Does the mention of Adam in Luke 3 suggest a young earth?

[Justin108]

Does the mention of Adam in Luke 3:23-38 suggest a young earth? If Adam is indeed the first man, surely the genealogy in Luke would be much longer

[JehovahsWitness]

Does the mention of Adam in Luke 3:23-38 suggest a young earth? If Adam is indeed the first man, surely the genealogy in Luke would be much longer

Not necessarily, unless one believes Adam was created before the earth. I personally belive ,man appeared on the world scene long after the plane was formed.

[Justin108]

Does the mention of Adam in Luke 3:23-38 suggest a young earth? If Adam is indeed the first man, surely the genealogy in Luke would be much longer

Not necessarily, unless one believes Adam was created before the earth.

Very well, does it suggest a young species then? That is to say, does Luke 3:23-38 suggest the human race to be far younger than the 200 000 years that science suggests?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 3 by Justin108]

Yes definitely, bible chronology dates humanity to about 6,000 years. I believe 6,0042 to be exact.

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 3 by Justin108]

Yes definitely, bible chronology dates humanity to about 6,000 years. I believe 6,0042 to be exact.

And you believe this is true, despite science suggesting otherwise?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 3 by Justin108]

Yes definitely, bible chronology dates humanity to about 6,000 years. I believe 6,0042 to be exact.

And you believe this is true, despite science suggesting otherwise?

Yes I do. I have no problem at all with the bible chronology.

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 3 by Justin108]

Yes definitely, bible chronology dates humanity to about 6,000 years. I believe 6,0042 to be exact.

And you believe this is true, despite science suggesting otherwise?

Yes I do. I have no problem at all with the bible chronology.

Care to explain the 160 000 year old human fossil found in Ethiopia?

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/rele ... altu.shtml

[earl]

This is an interesting topic.
When I compared three lineage charts in the Bible I did not find a perfect match.It has been a while ago but the Luke chart and another did not match.Please correct me if I do not remember correctly.
Weather the charts go back to even 100,000 is subject to much debate but what the Jewish historians did was is trace their lineage back to Adam and Eve only.
The second thing they did was is to call Adam the first man.
The third thing they did was is to place any humanoid and any animal in the same category.
Thus you will find a beast of the field deceiving Eve at Gen.3.1.
This beast of the field showed hatred ,a human characteristic,not animal,in Ge, 3.15 against Eve's descendants and his against her descendants.
Not to be disrespectful to anyone but the beast of the field is what the Jewish historians labeled anyone who is not a descendant of Adam as heathen,Gentile,and Goy.
Beasts,beast of the field and brute beasts is common in the Bible and by reading it is easy to tell which is and which is not an animal.
Beasts of the field,Heathen ,Gentile and Goy have all been used disparagingly as when Jesus once used the word dog refering to a Gentile.
The beast of the field who deceived Eve was human but not Adam's descendant

[earl]

The Bible in itself shows proof of the existence of human life before Adam and Eve.
Eve was deceived by a human but not Eve's seed because also Eve's seed had hatred for Serpent's seed who was beasts of the field.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

[Replying to post 3 by Justin108]

Yes definitely, bible chronology dates humanity to about 6,000 years. I believe 6,0042 to be exact.

If humans have only existed for about 6,000 years, then the 12,000 year old ruins at Gobekli Tepe in Turkey must be genuine proof that the Earth has been visited by extraterrestrials. Either that or the Bible and those who would interpret the creation of humans according to the Bible at 6,000 years ago is nothing but pure ignorant nonsense.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/worlds-oldest- ... ng-1511137
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/g ... -83613665/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016 ... chaeology/