Carbon dating christian view

You appear to support the evolutionists theory. However, other Christian scientists e. Ken Ham totally refute this theory and provide evidence of the creation, even challenging carbon dating, etc… I welcome your thoughts. I am well aware of Ken Ham and his arguments. I have read some of his work. I do not find his "scientific" young earth theory to be credible.

The fatal flaw with radioactive dating methods

There are several places you could research. A few are https: Do not just stop at looking into carbon dating as that really is only used for animal or beings type dating due to its decay rate but also look at the ones used for dating rocks like potassium argon for example. In short the issues with these dating methods are their false assumptions and clear data of live or recently died animals as well as rock from recent volcanic events like Mt St Helens showing very old dates impossible.

There are also tons of other evidences right before our eyes as to my the Bible is correct in its word. To begin to answer this question, you need to understand one thing - not all Christians believe in a young earth. Below I have provided some threads on Connect that should help you grapple with how to interpret Genesis 1 and why there are different views of the age of the earth among Bible believing Christians. Personally, I have read the books produced by ICR that suggest that decay rates may not have been constant in the past and that we therefore cannot extrapolate beyond a few thousand years because catastrophic events like the flood may have altered decay rates or God may have altered them.

Personally, however, I do not think this argument would convince a skeptic who has a naturalistic worldview and the Bible says nothing about decay rates being changed - so it seems like the whole argument is circular. If the earth is young the decay rates must have changed - we believe the earth is young, so we posit that the decay rates were not constant. The issue of the age of the earth should not divide Christians, so I believe there is room for disagreement here.

This is one of many links that will give some insights into carbon dating but this is possibly just the tip of the topic. Other have already made some good points regarding the ultimate question, the age of the earth. SeanO thank you for that!! However God only knows, but if we get it wrong, do you think it is dangerous to believe the wrong way? You can hold to young earth or old earth and still believe that:. The age of the earth, to me, is either an opinion or conviction. It would only be dangerous to disagree if it was an absolute - something core to Christian belief.

Or would the old earth just be the earth and its formation itself and not that abraham and adam and eve were some how cave men or like that kind of thing. Hopefully that makes sense THankyou. It is true that those two beliefs are often linked together, but they do not have to be… The universe could be billions of years old while God still created humans from the dust. Here is Hugh Ross talking about an old earth Christian perspective a little bit.

He personally rejects evolution and yet accepts old earth. His view is one way of approaching this topic. Also, some Christians though I do not believe that God used evolution to create human like creature and then intervened in the case of Adam and Eve to do something extra special. Adam and Eve were, according to this view, a kind of singularity where God stepped in and intervened in the process of evolution.

Personally I do not find macro-evolution convincing as a scientific theory, even without the Bible. Christ be with you. This topic is near and dear to my heart for several reasons, not least of which is my circumstance of teaching science in a college classroom and the deep desire to be a good witness. I will be starting the Science elective in October, and am very much looking forward to it. Above all, in my opinion, we must discuss these issues with great humility and a view toward what are critical, doctrinal issues, versus opinions on which salvation does not depend.

SeanO has made wonderful comments in that regard. I deeply appreciate that and look forward to browsing some of the resources he has shared. As we are in the early weeks of the semester and life is hectic, it will be a while, but thanks for sharing those! Can we trust carbon dating? Daily Evangelism. Jfynyson Jeremy Finison September 12, , 2: SeanO SeanO September 12, , May the Lord Jesus grant you wisdom as you study.

Feel free to ask further questions. SeanO SeanO September 13, , 2: You can hold to young earth or old earth and still believe that: Does that make sense? Blessings, Renee.

Any scientist with an open mind would tell you that if these assumptions were shifted towards a Biblical view, the carbon dating process would. For more than ten years now a paper by Roger Wiens entitled 'Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective' has been saying that radio-isotopic.

Department of the History of Science Helen C. White Hall Madison, WI PSCF 45 December R adiocarbon C dating has several implications for Christianity, particularly in terms of the interpretation of the first part of Genesis. Since its advent in the midth century, it has been one of the central topics in the creation-evolution controversy.

Whenever the worldview of evolution is questioned, the topic of carbon dating always comes up. Here is how carbon dating works and the assumptions it is based upon.

There are several places you could research. A few are https: Do not just stop at looking into carbon dating as that really is only used for animal or beings type dating due to its decay rate but also look at the ones used for dating rocks like potassium argon for example.

Does carbon dating prove the earth is millions of years old?

Lisle Oct 27, Geology , Origins , Physics. We are told that scientists use a technique called radiometric dating to measure the age of rocks. We are also told that this method very reliably and consistently yields ages of millions to billions of years, thereby establishing beyond question that the earth is immensely old — a concept known as deep time. This apparently contradicts the biblical record in which we read that God created in six days, with Adam being made on the sixth day. From the listed genealogies, the creation of the universe happened about years ago.

Carbon-14 Dating Does Not Disprove the Bible

The imposing Judahite fortress of Khirbet Qeiyafa has been securely dated by pottery and radiocarbon analysis to the early tenth century B. But archaeology says otherwise. Did they live in the archaeological period known as Iron Age I, which is archaeologically poorly documented, or in Iron Age IIa, for which more evidence is available. Proponents of low Bible chronology, called minimalists , claim the transition occurred around to B. Proponents of a high Bible chronology put the date around to B. Some scholars have asked if radiocarbon dating accuracy will help settle the question. What is radiocarbon dating? Is radiocarbon dating accuracy indeed more reliable to determine Bible chronology than traditional dating methods that rely on archaeological evidence that looks at strata context?

What is a Christian to make of radioactive dating? To those who have not encountered the topic before the paper can seem very convincing.

A swimming race illustrates the simple principles involved in measuring time. This swimmer is competing in a 1, metre race and we have an accurate, calibrated wristwatch. We note that at the instant the swimmer touches the edge of the pool our wristwatch reads 7:

Rethinking Carbon-14 Dating: What Does It Really Tell Us about the Age of the Earth?

It is not a matter of whether the science itself is faulty. The reality is that the science is rather elegant in its function. The challenge is that it operates under a set of assumptions. Any scientist with an open mind would tell you that if these assumptions were shifted towards a Biblical view, the carbon dating process would still work, though at a much shorter time scale. In other words, whether you assume that the planet is billions of years old or if you believe that the earth is thousands of years old, carbon dating still works in both situations. In several documented situations when carbon dating ran contrary to common scientific assumptions, the results were only an anomaly if the world were billions of years old. If the earth were thousands of years old, the results of these tests would have fit in perfectly. Carbon 14 C is a radioactive isotope of carbon that is in a constant state of decay. Scientists are able to determine the age of formerly living materials by determining the amount of 14 C relative to the amount of Carbon 12 C. Since the former is radioactive and decays at a constant pace while the latter is stable, the ratio between the two can determine the age of anything that was on the earth and breathed.

Rethinking Carbon-14 Dating: What Does It Really Tell Us about the Age of the Earth?

Carbon dating is the standard method used by scientists to determine the age of certain fossilized remains. As scientists will often claim something to be millions or billions of years old ages that do not conform to the Biblical account of the age of the earth , Christians are often left wondering about the accuracy of the carbon method. This is carbon Carbon is an unstable, radioactive isotope of carbon As with any radioactive isotope, carbon decays over time. The half-life of carbon 14 is approximate 5, years.

Does carbon dating prove the earth is millions of years old?

Sponsored link. Most individual creation scientists and creation science organizations are called "new-earth creationists. New-Earth creationism is mainly promoted by people who believe that the Bible authors were inspired by God to write text that is inerrant -- free of error. New-earth creationists obviously cannot accept the accuracy of the C dating method. For example:. Creation scientists cannot accept these dates as accurate since they believe that the world was created sometime between and BCE. Since the accuracy of the Bible cannot be questioned, C dating must contain massive errors -- by as much as a factor of five.

See this page in: Hungarian , Russian , Spanish. P eople who ask about carbon 14 C dating usually want to know about the radiometric [1] dating methods that are claimed to give millions and billions of years—carbon dating can only give thousands of years. People wonder how millions of years could be squeezed into the biblical account of history. Clearly, such huge time periods cannot be fitted into the Bible without compromising what the Bible says about the goodness of God and the origin of sin, death and suffering —the reason Jesus came into the world See Six Days? Christians , by definition, take the statements of Jesus Christ seriously.

However, these excessively long ages are easily explained within the biblical worldview, and 14 C actually presents a serious problem for believers in an old earth. Nearly anyone can verify this for themselves using basic multiplication and division. Any carbon atom has six protons within its nucleus, but the different isotopes have different numbers of neutrons. Cosmic rays mainly high-energy protons trigger a process in the atmosphere that changes atmospheric nitrogen into 14 C. However, unlike the other two carbon isotopes, 14 C is unstable and eventually decays back into nitrogen.

Whenever the worldview of evolution is questioned, the topic of carbon dating always comes up. Here is how carbon dating works and the assumptions it is based upon. Radiation from the sun strikes the atmosphere of the earth all day long. This energy converts about 21 pounds of nitrogen into radioactive carbon This radioactive carbon 14 slowly decays back into normal, stable nitrogen. Extensive laboratory testing has shown that about half of the C molecules will decay in 5, years. This is called the half-life.

Carbon Dating Exposed - Evolution is a Lie - Kent Hovind
Related publications