If it was proven that the Earth is no more than 10,000 years old

Faith & Science Conversation
21

That works fine as an analogy to what has happened to the world constructed in our minds from the interpreted data. But when the consistency proven over lifetimes by millions of people is suddenly overturned, which is more likely: that whole universe has changed, or simply that we ourselves have changed?

22

It’s a valid question and not everybody that believes in a “young earth” believes in the equivalent of magic or fairy tales.

It’s very possible that there are scientific mechanisms at work about which we are unaware.

No?

1 Like
23

That seems contradictory to the big bang though

24

I’m sorry, but that’s not a hypothetical that I find even particularly interesting – it’s kind of up there with “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?”

I think that YECism belies the import of Psalm 8:4, not only because of the vastness of the size of the universe, but also because of the vastness of its antiquity.

What is man, that you are mindful of him?[!]

25

That is like saying not everyone who believes in fairies believes in unicorns or dragons. But the comparison was with “fairies roaming the earth” and a “flat earth on three elephants and a turtle” which rather obviously contradicts the objective evidence which anyone can get for themselves. We cannot know that there are no fairies anywhere, but if they exist then they certainly do not roam the earth in plain sight. Likewise the all the evidence from the earth and sky volumes upon volumes all contradict a young earth and thus is quite as much in front of our eyes as these other things.

No.

The only thing possible here is a complete unawareness on the part of some people of the scientific mechanisms and all the volumes of data which other people with a little education have seen with their own eyes.

26

Thanks for all your responses, very interesting. The reason I raised this question is because it seems discussing the age of the earth is even more contentious than evolution. I have seen a strong emotional response from some people when this issue is raised. I wondered why, so I asked some people some questions. I asked in what way would a person change their lifestyle if it was proven that the earth could not be more than 10,000 years old. Would they change careers,? move house or emigrate? change their diet? change their holiday plans? and so on and so on. Apparently it would make no difference to the vast majority of people. So why do some people get so upset about it?

3 Likes
27

Awesome response.

1 Like
28

If I was dead, dreaming, or living in a fairy tale world then the impact on my life would be enormous. That is what such an inconsistency as you propose would imply. Some people simply have an awareness of the universe around them that doesn’t extend beyond bed, workplace, and bar or church where they babble whatever nonsense pops into their head. But for those who look out at the world beyond, such an alteration of the facts is as obvious as sun and moon in the sky.

1 Like
29

It would mean I could put my trust neither in God nor in science.

2 Likes
30

I am assuming like others you mean what if science proved that YEC was correct, and that God created everything in six days fully evolved and that all of the scientists were truly guided by political and secular agendas and false notions then very little would change. I would just admit I was wrong on theology and influenced by secular peer pressure or whatever you call it. Thankfully that’s not true lol.

1 Like
31

How could disinterested science prove it against all the proof - which is all there is - otherwise? What would do it? What could science discover that overturns ALL science scientifically?

1 Like
32

Just pretend you’re watching a sci-fi movie and suspend disbelief. (I couldn’t do that as well as @Realspiritik did. :slightly_smiling_face:)

33

I don’t know. I guess it would mostly be some kind of conspiracy breakthrough showing how they were purposely trying to mislead us.

It does not exist. This is a hypothetical question about another completely different reality guided by different laws.

34

There is NO POSSIBILITY that there are scientific mechanisms at work about which we are unaware!?

Honestly, the hubris of that sentiment is shocking.

Reminds me of:

“There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement.” - Lord Kelvin

Of course, he said that before the discovery of relativity and quantum mechanics…

1 Like
35

There is NO POSSIBILITY that there are mechanism at work which can change all the evidence from the earth and sky to make it support Young Earth Creationism. The discoveries of hard science can NEVER EVER change all the evidence already accumulated, and it NEVER has. The FIRST test of any new theory is whether it agrees with the evidence already accumulated, otherwise it must be rejected outright.

No the real hubris here is insisting on beliefs contrary to all the data God sends us from the Earth and sky! Shouting back at God that He is lying to us.

36

Indeed, it would mean that the universe was an artifact of a hypercapricious superintelligence. I’m not sure I’d change anything about my life unless I really thought the universe made no sense at all, in which case I bet I’d spend a lot more time with my kids. I sure wouldn’t gain any respect for “god,” and amazingly I might even lose some. No mean feat.

1 Like
37

Here’s a thought experiment for you Michael. Just suppose that someone called Ken Bacon came along and started preaching that the earth is flat. But not only is he insisting that the earth is flat, he is also denouncing anyone who believes in a spherical earth as “undermining the authority of the entire Bible.” Some of his followers are denouncing anyone who believes in a spherical earth as “so-called Christians” who are “rejecting God’s authority.” Now imagine that his hard-line flat-earth teaching becomes really popular in your church to the extent that you, as a spherical earther, start to get treated with suspicion or even hostility.

Now just suppose that this movement started making people within your church view the airline industry with hostility as well. That your pastor started making snide remarks about “secular aeroplanes” or “putting your faith in aeroplanes.” Or using “airline pilot” as a synonym for “unbeliever” or “atheist.”

Now imagine that you yourself are an airline pilot, or are training to become an airline pilot.

Imagine that as a result of this teaching, you end up feeling ashamed and embarrassed about it, or that you turn away from a rewarding and well-paid career in the aviation industry as a result. Or that, perhaps, you get told by people in your church that you had “a spirit of aviation that was making it hard for you to hear God.”

Would that upset you?

Now just substitute “young earth” for “flat earth” and “scientist” for “airline pilot” and you’ll get the picture. Because that is exactly what it is like.

6 Likes
38

That’s what it is like for you. But for most of the people that I speak to, it’s not a big deal - it’s more of a ‘shrug of the shoulders’ or “So what, I’ve got more important things to think about.”

39

Thank you Liam for your testimony about leaving YEC, it was very interesting.

2 Likes
40

Correct, there are no missing scientific mechanisms of the scale between classical and modern physics. The analogy with Kelvin is utterly inadequate. Classical physicists from Planck onward gave us QM and relativity. Galactic rotation necessitates dark matter, which Kelvin was the first to note of course two centuries ago (black holes go back another two of course). It’s not a sentiment and there’s no hubris in it. Just disinterested carefulness.