The Age of the Earth: The Bible is Reliable

[A common question is asked by believers]: “I know it seems that way, but I can’t help thinking that if it is categorically proved (or the evidence strongly suggests) that the Earth is much older, say millions of years old…” The following comments are by staff of Creation International.]

[These questions] reveal some common misconceptions about science, proof and age. [They] also seem to be unsure about the reliability of the Bible.

Scientists will never be able to categorically prove the earth is millions of years old. Age cannot be measured, only calculated, and all such calculations rely on unprovable assumptions. See Immeasurable age. The only accurate way to determine age is from reliable historical records, and among ancient records the Bible stands alone for its supreme reliability.

The science that generates the many technologies we enjoy today is operational science, which involves repeated observation and testing. See Is it science? But historical events, such as the creation or evolution of man, lie within the realm of historical science, beyond the reach of the scientific method to either prove or disprove. We cannot directly observe or measure events that occurred in the past. Artifacts, fossils and rocks do not ‘speak for themselves’ but must be interpreted within a framework of beliefs about the past. See Faith and facts and this article on the role of axioms which determine the framework in which data are interpreted.

The fact is that the Bible is reliable, including in what it says about the age of the earth. Yes, we may state this dogmatically, but not without good reason. As noted…there is a multitude of scientific data (observations, measurements) which are extraordinarily difficult to reconcile with a long-age view of history, and yet readily make sense from a young-earth creationist perspective.

It is the same with the Resurrection; scientists will never be able to categorically prove it did not happen, and there is much evidence that only makes sense if it did happen, for example the willing martyrdom of thousands of first century Christians. See Did Jesus Christ really rise from the dead? Almighty God, the very Creator of language, has informed us plainly in the Bible that Jesus rose from the dead, so we need not worry that one day, say, an archaeologist will discover the bones of Jesus. Even if an archaeologist were to make such a claim, we know that it couldn’t be correct. Christianity could have been cut off at its roots if the Pharisees or Romans had been able to produce the body or bones of Jesus, which would have distinctive marks due to crucifixion with nails (John:20:25The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the LORD. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
See All...). Of course they never did produce such evidence because the tomb was empty on the third day.

We can be confident in what the Bible says about the Resurrection and other miraculous historical events, without needing to seek naturalistic explanations as some do (see Materialist ‘defence’ of Bible fails, The ten plagues of Egypt: Miracles or ‘Mother Nature’ and Did Jesus walk on ice?), and we can be confident in what the Bible says about the age of the earth too.

https://creation.com/the-age-of-the-earth-the-bible-is-reliable?utm_source=creation.com&utm_medium=slider&utm_campaign=homepage_slider