Why the Age of the Earth Matters

[Josh]

Why I think the Determining the Age of the Earth is Important for Christian Apologetics

First off, just a little "prologue":

Virtually the entire scientific community agrees that the universe is 13.7 billion years old, based on numerous independent tests (based in turn on predictions made by the theory of general relativity*) whose results have steadily reduced the margin of error to less than 2%. The only major proponents of a 6,000- 10,000 year old universe are Christians (or others coming from a purely religious viewpoint). The scientific evidence alone has not convinced one non-religious scientist of a young-earth position that I’m aware of (correct me if I’m wrong).

I say all this to support some of the following points:

1) Truth is important, and we have a responsibility to let good evidence lead us to closest agreement with reality as possible. There is a reason why we accept heliocentric theory, or that the earth isn’t flat. It would be silly to say, “Why does it matter to my faith whether I believe the earth is the center of the universe or not” because there is such good evidence for a heliocentric universe. Of course it matters because truth is truth. I’m arguing that the evidence, once really sifted through from all angles, is solid enough for the age of the universe to eliminate any reasonable doubt.

2) Many, many skeptics reject Christianity for perceiving it as teaching that the universe is only several thousand years old. This issue is a major intellectual obstacle for modern secular humanists, not because they are believing bad science, but because they have heard that an old universe is incompatible with the Bible.

3) “Appearance of age” theories call the apologetic value of science itself into doubt, and thereby undermine rational defenses of the faith. I’ve gone into this a bit already, but I think we need to talk about this much more.

4) Some of the best evidences for the existence of the God of the Bible only come from an old-earth perspective- especially anti-naturalistic arguments regarding the origin of the universe and the origin of life.

5) If we hold to a young-earth position we must maintain that when the entire non-Christian scientific community says the universe cannot be only 10,000 years old that they are either stupid, easily duped, or dishonest. Those are serious charges. And I think if they are basing their information on the best evidence available to them, then that puts God in an awkward position for tricking them (as I mentioned in point 3 above), rather than using “all creation to show the glory of God”.

This issue of the age of the universe should not be confused with issues related to evolution, which is a matter of much debate in the scientific community, regardless of religious affiliation, by the way.

That’s just the beginning of “why I think this issue is important” and I don’t have time to polish it, but I thought I’d get it out there and I’m sure you’ll all help me do that anyway!

Again, this is all in the spirit of honest, humble, truth-seeking among friends.



*Predictive tests being much more compelling than tests designed to arrive at pre-determined results.

[robin]

Hi Josh,
In time I would like to take your points and address them individually, but I would like to ask a simple question and see if you agree.

1. Would you agree with the following 2 statements? Most of the scientific community is atheistic. Most of the scientific community would take great joy in abolishing all religion from society, in favor of a society that only looks at what science can prove and discounts spirituality as nothing more that child play.

Robin

[Josh]

Well, according to Dr. Ross a huge percent of research scientists in the US (and increasingly so in China) believe that there might be a god (based on science) but don't see how that belief can mix with their scientific knowledge on other issues.

I tend to see that as true.

However, there are many outspoken and famous scientists who are ardent atheists- some of whom would definitely like to see the end of Chrsitianity.

But then again, I think there are many atheists who are still honest with the facts.

Lastly, big-bang cosmology is actually something that many atheist scientists have done their best to try (in vain) to find a loophole out of because of it's strong implications toward theism.

I'd recommend a read through Ross's "Creator and the Cosmos" for a great history of this trend.

In short, big-bang cosmology has been more of a hindrance to atheists than a boon.

Before big-bang cosmology the dominant theory was that the universe had always been. This was great for atheists. If the majority of scientists were opposed to Chrsitianity to the point of fudging facts, what could have possibly have motivated them to move from a theory of an eternal, beginning-less universe to the hot big bang model but interaction with actual facts?

[sonlyte]

The majority of science believing individuals that I have personally known tend to conclude that they don't have a conclusion with respect to God's existence.
I can think of only one science believing person among those whom I have personally known who was really against christianity.
One science-type fellow who I work with now had concluded that Christians were backwards thinking idiots...until he met me. We had a lot of talks about God in science and when he realized that God's existence was not only scientifically possible but likely, he changed his view.
He did not look into scientific conclusions to get away from God, but was simply taught them from the beginning and because of a lot of interaction with Christians who were totally opposed to those conclusions, he developed a negative attitude about God.
Interestingly enough, the christian influence did more to dissuade him from belief in God than the science influence.
There are several others like him that I have known in my life.
I used to think that the scientific community was opposed to God, but like any community the most impassioned ones are the most outspoken and often do the most damage. I think I have just identified the whole of the community by the extreme minority.