When God has important things for us to know, the Bible will clearly and over and over again repeat the information—this is exactly what we do not have with the age of the Earth. God did not seem to care what we know about it. The only time it becomes a problem is when Christians claim something is God-given, when it isn’t.
Brief Answer:
I know the world is at least 55 years old.
The Bible does not give us a specific age or even a reliable age range for the Earth or the universe. From Scripture alone, we cannot say for sure whether the Earth is young or old. Any attempt to assign an age requires using interpretations and assumptions that go beyond what the Bible itself says.
Because of this, we can give our thoughts, but must be careful not to claim the Bible demands a particular view—whether young or old. Instead, we should test all teachings carefully, respect people with differing perspectives, recognize this as a non-essential belief, and avoid causing others to struggle in their relationship with God over this issue.
Detailed Answer:
After a couple stories about funny/ugly interactions, we will explain the possible answers regarding the age of the Earth and Universe, the possible dangers, and why we cannot get a reliable age from the Bible.
Angry Starts
Enjoying thoughtful discussions has led me to countless interactions with those believing differently from me, and almost all have been productive and enjoyable.
However, let us now consider two of the more humorous times someone was furiously yelling in my face. One instance involved a discussion on LGBTQ+, during which the other person, a white heterosexual man, quickly went into name-calling and yelling with anger incredibly out of place.
You can watch my videos or read my articles to see how I approach this sensitive and serious topic, and decide for yourself if his fury was warranted. Not a funny situation, but it was kind of funny, as I observed once he paused, “You realize you are yelling I am a horrible person because you assume I demean and treat others terribly, and you are making your point by demeaning and treating me terribly.”
The other instance involved an argument with a Christian, at least he claimed to be Christian. This guy asked about the age of the universe. I said biblically you cannot get a reliable age, but told him what I thought. While not using name calling, this guy began his angry response with the same nasty tone and volume as in the previous example.
I again found it funny, and this time I laughed a little during his tirade. When he stopped and asked why I was laughing, I responded, “Does the same Bible you claim to take so seriously also tell you to treat a fellow brother this way?” Shut him down instantly.
While not angry with the person discussing LGBTQ+, I was angry in this instance, and added, “You are so lucky I already accept Jesus, because if I was questioning what belief was true, you could have pushed me away from Christ as I wouldn’t want to be like you.” This is serious, the Bible he supposedly accepts makes clear if you cause another to stumble in their relationship with God, you will be held accountable.
Emotions are a great aspect of life, but like fire, need to be kept in the proper place or damage occurs. If your belief about any topic is accurate, reality cannot help but bring more evidence and reasons supporting your beliefs, and expose false beliefs. So relax, and rely on reasons. What are your reasons for believing the universe is young or old?
And to parents and church leaders, who are tempted to avoid addressing this topic: your church members and especially youth will hear about this topic, and would you rather they hear from people intent on destroying biblical faith, or from a Bible believer like myself.
Bottom-line
It may be helpful to start with my main conclusion, an answer which may help discussions about the age of the universe be much more productive, and much less emotion heavy. The most important point to keep in mind regarding the question of age and the Bible:
We cannot get an age of the Universe or Earth from the Bible, not remotely close. As a Bible-believer, just as the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy stated, we can accept either young or old Earth biblically, but must be very careful to test all teachings, and not to let our extrapolations, interpretations or assumptions make others stumble.
The Possible Answers
Those who accept the Creator of the universe is responsible for the Bible have arrived at two different beliefs on the age question, either:
a. the universe and Earth are 10,000 years old or younger, or
b. the universe is around 13.8 billion years old, and the Earth is around 4.5 billion years old according to current estimates from science.
Estimates for the ages may change, but these are two distinctly different answers. The former will be referred to as young earth creationism (YEC), and the latter as old earth creationism (OEC). The discussion between YEC and OEC is a Bible believer issue because there are no scientists or people outside the church, as far as I am aware, who believe the Universe and Earth are young.
The Possible Dangers
The goal in writing this response is to keep good discussion going, while helping those Bible-believers involved keep themselves in a safe and productive place. This discussion is provided only to help you recognize and keep yourself free from the consequences. There are several ways you expose yourself to danger if advocating for either YEC or OEC:
a. Claiming something as the Word of God when it is not.
b. Causing someone to stumble in their relationship with God.
c. Improper motives and treatment of others.
If your advocation for YEC or OEC falls into any of those situations above, as a Bible believer you should recognize you are acting against God, which only brings negative consequences.
a. Claiming YEC or OEC is God’s Word
Jesus confronted religious leaders and teachers harshly when they added their own ideas to what the Bible actually states, especially when declaring not accepting their claims was rejecting God’s Word (Matthew 15:3–9). There are people today claiming accepting the opposing position on the age of the Earth is rejecting God’s Word.
If the age range is not clearly given in the Bible as either YEC or OEC, and is only held through assumptions, going beyond what God’s Word actually provides, and just follows some traditions taught, then declaring an age and claiming anyone believing otherwise means you reject biblical authority, is placing oneself dangerously close to those religious leaders Jesus warned in Mark 7:13: “thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
The Bible redundantly, from Old Testament to New Testament makes this warning, for example: Revelation 22:18–19, Jeremiah 23:16, 31-32, Deuteronomy 4:2, and Proverbs 30:5-6: “Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.”
Have you observed religious leaders and teachers adding to the words of the Bible with their own interpretations and assumptions and traditions? This happened in history when leaders in the Catholic church, who followed the common understanding of the time that the Earth was fixed and the universe revolved around us, rejected Galileo’s claim of the Earth revolving around the Sun as unbiblical, and were shown to be wrong. Or, do any of you still believe the universe revolves around the Earth? Have you observed people doing the same today regarding the age of the Earth? I have, over and over again.
Ask any person claiming you can get an age from the Bible to explain how they know, in detail. Then, make a list of every assumption they have to make to support their claim. Just one assumption added onto God’s Word and claiming it is doctrine is sketchy. Worse, those claiming the Bible gives YEC or OEC have to employ multiple assumptions, and many add in a load of known errors in logic. In the last section, I will show there is no way to get a reliable age from the Bible.
b. Casting Stumbling Stones
And what if you make an incorrect interpretation and it causes someone to stumble? There are recurrent warnings about causing others to stumble. Here is an example from Jesus given in Luke 17:1, from Paul in Romans 14:13-15, and two more specifically regarding younger believers in Matthew 18:6 and Mark 9:42.
Because only people within the church are claiming the Earth is young, and, to the contrary, all education and science not provided by Bible-believers claims a young age of the Earth is absurd, then if the Bible actually had clearly given a young age, and the consensus in science gets overturned with new evidence, then this is a tremendous example of the Bible proclaiming accuracy against all other worldviews. OEC proponents would be exposed as accepting the authority of science over the Bible, if the Bible clearly stated a young age. This situation already occurred with the question of whether the universe had a beginning or not, but the difference in that situation was the Bible does clearly state the universe had a beginning, but does not clearly provide an age.
On the other hand, if the Earth is shown to be 4.5 billion years old, then as was the case with the Catholic Church claiming the Earth does not move, people, especially school children, will certainly stumble in their faith as they will they would think the Bible itself was inaccurate, instead of only the YEC proponent.
Those claiming OEC or YEC is biblical doctrine could also cause a non-believer (someone wondering if they should trust the biblical God) to stumble if we later find the opposite is true, when it never was part of God’s Word. However, considering there is no scientist or person outside the church, as far as I am aware, who believes the universe and Earth are young, the danger is much less for OEC.
c. Bad motivations and treatment of others
Motivations and how you treat others are also important considerations, and will bring consequences. Some YEC believers claim those supporting OEC only do so because they trust science more than the Bible, and are willing to sacrifice biblical reliability when it conflicts with science or culture. That is likely an accurate assumption in some cases, but is also an unfair and inaccurate generalization in other cases. I have seen some people and churches abandon clear and fundamental biblical doctrines because of cultural pressure, but the question is: is the age of the Earth a clear and fundamental biblical belief? It is not, as we will show.
Do you believe in OEC because you believe science as a trustworthy source over the Bible? Aside from the fact the greatest discoveries in science demonstrated the Bible to be thousands of years ahead of and correct against the consensus of science, which believed in an eternal universe, we also have unparalleled evidence there is a God responsible for the Bible, making it a source of knowledge beyond anything produced solely by humanity alone. Therefore, placing trust in science over the Bible is demonstrably questionable.
Further, if you are distrusting the reliability of the Bible, this will undoubtedly hinder your relationship with and service to God.
On the other hand, do you believe in YEC because you think an old Earth or evolution is a problem for the Bible? The answer to what is the age of the Earth, or is evolution true, will not impact the reliability of the Bible. There will be several articles explaining why on the website, including a brief description below why the question of age is insignificant.
Do you believe in YEC because you are unable to handle the fact that you or a religious teacher you respect could have interpreted the Bible wrong? If you accept there is a God behind the Bible, then you should understand science and the Bible will mutually benefit and support each other, as both are dependent upon God’s truth, and both need to be tested due to man’s imperfect interpretation of science and man’s imperfect interpretation of the Bible. This happened in the Galileo and Catholic Church situation. Do not make the same mistake, instead test and examine all things so you may hold on to the good and accurate. 1 Thessalonians 5:21, 1 John 4:1, Acts 17:1.
If you are getting mad reading this—check yourself—why, what motivates your emotion? I have heard OEC condescendingly speak about those who are YEC, and vice-versa, as well as arrogant and entirely unloving approach towards others on both sides. Unlike the lack of a specific age range of the universe, the Bible clearly defined how to treat others we may disagree with. “Be devoted to one another in love. Welcoming and honor one another above yourselves.” As noted in Romans 12:10, as well as other passages: Ephesians 4:2, Colossians 3:12, Romans 15:7, 1 Thessalonians 5:1, Colossians 3:13, John 13:34-35, Galatians 6:2, Ephesians 4:32, 1 Corinthians 1:10.
This is not a salvation dependent, church dividing, doctrinally imperative issue. If we are discussing whether Christ is the only path to restored relationship with God, or there are other ways to Heaven, then yes, this is a salvation issue, core doctrine, and you should firmly advocate what the Bible clearly states, and walk away from any church teaching there are other ways to salvation.
But the question of age is not foundationally significant, so Bible believers should gather information, argue their points, and be open to good discussion with those who believe differently on this issue. You can have unity in thought on the essential issues, but still disagree on non-essentials.
Lacking this pure motivation and treatment towards fellow brothers and sisters, exposes you as one who needs to get the plank out of your own eye before going after the spec in another’s eye (Matthew 7:3-5).
There are other consequences, for example, YEC will often take abuse or be looked down upon by those outside the church, who judge harshly those believing in a young Earth. However, if the Bible clearly stated the Earth is 10,000 years old or less, then taking abuse for teaching and supporting God’s Word will bring more benefit than such abuse. However, you are not standing strong on God’s Word, but on teaching that goes beyond wat the Bible provides. And if you are wrong, rebuke from non-believers is the least of the consequences you need worry about.
Always wise not to simply accept what professors, popular people, preachers, media, myself, or even your mom tells you about beliefs, but take in all the information available and decide for yourself, as you will experience the consequences of your choices, right or wrong. Reality is a good but harsh instructor.
Reality, and those outside your community of similar beliefs can be harsh enough, we do not need to let emotion cause us to be harsh against fellow brothers and sisters. Especially considering the Bible we supposedly support specifically says to be gentle in our instruction with one another, humble and caring more for the best for the other person.
Why it is not possible to get an age from the Bible
First, if you think the Bible provides a definitive age, or even a range of ages that fit only in YEC or OEC, I would be interested to hear why. Please send in your biblical proof to info@FaithFactCheck.com.
Second, look through church history, the age of the Earth has never been a test for orthodoxy, generally not in creeds, doctrinal statements, or treated as a significant topic. When it became a hotter topic in modern times, multiple councils, seminaries and collections of biblical scholars[1] supported both biblical inerrancy and the fact the Bible does not provide a clear answer to the age of the universe or Earth. If you think it does, then what greater evidence than these scholars do you bring?
Third, let’s look at some of the assumptions one would need to make to get an age, and why these assumptions are all inaccurate.
When Bishop Ussher presented his calculation of the age of the Earth in 1650, there was not much evidence to make people think this planet was vastly old. Therefore, Ussher used genealogies and timelines in the Bible, and coordinated with historical sources to claim the Earth began October 23, 4004 BC. Many were so enamored with the idea, his theory was widely published in the margin of the King James Bible beginning in the 18th century, as though it were part of God’s Word, and his chronology became accepted and taught in Western Christianity for centuries.
While it is an interesting and worthwhile study to try to determine an age, his claim should have been met with serious skepticism, especially when he claimed to know the exact day the world began. He even gave the precise hour of the day![2]
To base a calculation on the biblical genealogies and expect to have a remotely reliable answer, we would have to make at least five assumptions—all five would have to be true—yet we will show all five assumptions are false, biblically.
Five False Assumptions
- There are no undated or untimed verses involved in the calculation.
- There are no missing people in the genealogies.
- The genealogies would have to be for the purpose of determining dates and times.
- The genealogies were done during ancient times the same as we do them today.
- There are no missing time periods.
1. Undated & untimed verses
One does not have to search long to demonstrate an error in the first assumption. The first two verses of the Bible are involved in the calculation of age, and are undated and untimed.
Genesis 1:1-2 states: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.” The date when this activity occurred is not given, nor are we told how long this activity took to accomplish. If you disagree, what is your biblical proof?
The first two verses are stating God had brought the entire physical universe into existence in the past, and now the Spirit of God is at the watery surface of the earth, before the acts upon the earth occur. How do we know this? Because the verb used for “created” is in the perfect tense, meaning what is being described in these verses is already a completed action in the past—whether it began and took one second or fifteen billion years—you cannot know from the Bible. If you assume this was an instantaneous act, then you are adding your own thoughts into God’s Word.
The process of bringing the universe into existence and to the situation where the Spirit was hovering over the waters is not given a starting date or duration. These first two verses simply provide the background of what had already occurred before God began doing the creative work to prepare the earth for his plan.
Therefore, this point alone means you are unable to get a reliable age of the universe or earth from the Bible.
You Need More Details
If you want further details as you still believe you can get a reliable age from the Bible, then continue with more detailed information below.
Ussher’s calculation assumed the bringing into existence of the entire universe, as well as formation of the earth was instantaneous. Why would you believe his assumption? The Bible gives us nothing regarding when, or how long this process took to occur, but only affirm God produced this effect. Where biblically do you get a beginning date and length of process for the creation of the universe?
Genesis was written in ancient Hebrew, a language which had less than 10,000 words to work with, and probably more like 3,000 in common use, if you do not count the names of people and locations. To compare, English has over a million words with 170,000 in current use. This is why some Hebrew words were used for a number of different meanings, and Hebrews further used what is known as an idiom or merism (combination of words giving a different meaning than the individual words alone; like “under the weather”, or “butterfly” having a different meaning than either “butter” or “fly) to describe something they did not have another word for.
Hebrews did not have the word “universe,” so they used “heavens and earth” to mean all of nature; the totality of creation. The Hebrew words translated as “heavens” and “earth,” shāmayim and ’ereş, have several literal definitions, however, throughout the Old Testament, when ancient Hebrews placed these words together, there is only one specific definition: “the totality of the physical universe.”[3]
Also in that first verse of the Bible, the verb used for “created”, bārā’[4], has very interesting implications. According to Strong’s Concordance and Hebrew linguistic scholars, this word means “to bring into existence something new,” which had not existed before, and an action only done by God. Additionally, because this verb is in the perfect tense (what is known as the Qal form), and while it often translates to simple past tense in modern English, what the perfect tense really indicates is a completed action—a finished task.
What does this mean? Because Genesis 1:1 begins with the perfect tense, and the narrative tense is not used until Genesis 1:3, Hebrew scholars recognize the first two verses are not attached to the sequence starting from the third verse.
Genesis is providing a narrative, an account of successive events leading up to the earth and history on the earth we are familiar with. But the narrative tense does not start until Genesis 1:3, which indicates what happened in Genesis 1:1-2 had already been completed in an undisclosed period of time in the past, setting the stage for the creative work God was about to do. Remarkably, the biblical writer included what is necessary in scientific studies; it describes the frame of reference by noting now the point of view is from the surface of the earth, from which we will now view God’s upcoming work.
The verb tense changes when we get to Genesis 1:3, which means this is the first command of God in a sequence of events, which modify the physical conditions and ecology of planet Earth.
2. Missing people in the genealogies
A second assumption is that there are no missing people in the genealogies. Not true. There are many examples throughout the Bible. Look at Ezra 7:3 and the same genealogy in 1 Chronicles 6:7-11. The same genealogy that is given in three steps in one place is given in nine steps in the other. Even in relatively short time periods, such as Matthew 1:8 listing Jehoram as the father of Uzziah, the actual time that elapsed between what seems as father and son are actually three further generations as shown in 2 Chronicles 21:4-26:23. Therefore, the time elapsed was actually 400% more than expected. And who knows for certain how many names or time periods were skipped, as calculating time lapse was not the purpose.
As Dr. John Millam observes in a more detailed article regarding biblical genealogies:
In modern times, genealogies are for the purpose of communicating detailed information about history and family relations. Our modern conception of genealogies is very different from how genealogies were used and understood in Biblical times. … Biblical genealogies fall into three main categories according to their purpose: familial, legal-political, and religious (a more detailed discussion can be found in the NIV Study Bible, Zondervan Bible Publishers, Grand Rapids, MI, 1985, “Introduction to 1 Chronicles: Genealogies.”).
Familial (or domestic) genealogies were primarily concerned about inheritance and privileges of firstborn sons. Legal-political genealogies are primarily centered on claims to a hereditary office, but other examples include establishing ancestry for land organization, territorial groupings, and military service. Religious genealogies were primarily used to establish membership in the Aaronic and Levitical priesthoods. … The function of a genealogy largely determines its structure and organization. In each of these cases, there is little reason or need to give a complete listing of names since it is ancestry, not the actual number of generations that is important. … If Moses had intended the ages at fatherhood in Genesis 5 and 11 to be summed then he would have listed the total amount of time spanned. This feature is noticeably absent. Moreover, nowhere in all of Scripture is there any indication that these genealogies could be used as the basis of a chronology.[5]
If you asked who was my father, I would say David S. Symington. If you asked a person of that time and culture who their father was, you could be in for a vast answer as anyone who was a good guy and a blood relative was “father.” There is not a separate word for grandfather or great grandfather, etc., in Hebrew, therefore, the word “father” (ab) includes father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and ancestor. The words “begat” (yalad) and “son” (ben) are more words commonly used in biblical genealogies with much broader meanings than we use today.
In Genesis 46 there is a listing of the names of Jacob’s/Israel’s descendants as they were about to move from Caanan to Egypt, and you will find the phrase “sons [ben] of Israel” is applied to his sons, grandsons, a daughter and a granddaughter.
My mom’s interest led to significant research of our family’s genealogy, and the intent is to make them complete, without missing anyone. Most Biblical genealogies, on the other hand, intentionally leave out people. This is a recognized process called “telescoping.” In Hebrew (and similarly for Greek), the telescoped genealogies were viewed as perfectly true and acceptable because the audience recognized the purpose and process. It is sometimes apparent when this is done because the same genealogy is given in different passages, otherwise, it is very difficult, even impossible, to establish when a genealogy is complete or not.
Additionally, in the Bible when lists of numbers or names were meant to be added together, they were often followed by a sum total. This occurred when providing a grand total for the census of the tribes of Israel in Numbers 1:46. Another example was the listing and then total number of Jacob’s family moving to Egypt in Genesis 46. This is not the case in the genealogies used to calculate an age.
3. Genealogies were not for the purpose of determining dates and times
Were the biblical genealogies for the purpose of establishing dates of past events? Clearly not. This assumption is invalid, just check the beginning of the New Testament. Matthew chapter one states “Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham …” Was Jesus Abraham’s grandson? Of course not, just read the rest of the chapter and it becomes very clear that Jesus was a descendent of Abraham, and also that genealogies are not used for chronology. The focus here was Jesus’ fulfilling the line of descendants predicted, and also symbolic uses of specific numbers of generations being multiples of seven, even ignoring ancestors everyone knew about.
4. Genealogies were not done back then the same as we do them today
There have already been examples of this given. In Hebrew tradition many generations simply are not reported, which means their purpose was not for chronology, and further, are not reliable for dating. Even when numbers are used, it is clear it is not for the purpose of establishing lengths of time. Matthew points out 14 generations over and over, and as is true with Revelation, the number seven or its multiples take on symbolic importance. You could also compare 1 Chronicles 3:10-12 with Matthew 1:8, or Genesis 5 with Genesis 11 and Luke 3.
Genealogies would also have to be in chronological order – they are not always. Consider Noah’s sons being recorded in reverse order.
5. Missing time periods are unaccounted for
In order not to require a forklift to read your Bible, the Bible must be remarkably concise, and will necessarily leave out major time periods. Here is an undetermined period of time with no starting date nor length of time: the entire pre-Adam period. As stated previously, the creation of the universe and preparation of Earth, before the Spirit hovered over the waters could have taken an instant, or 100 billion years. The Bible does not say.
In fact, even if you want to assume the six day (yom) periods of creation are only twenty-four hours, which is definitely debatable as we will see in another FAQ, you would have to assume there is no time intervals between the creative “Yom.”
Are there Time Intervals between the creative “Yom”? When Hebrews gave an account of related events, a narrative, time intervals between the events in successive sentences often is understood to be unspecified. Meaning, there often is an unspecified interval of time passing between what occurs in one sentence and neighboring sentences. This is recognized, has demonstrable examples, and are a factor that must be put into any reliable equation attempting to determine an age. (Rodney Whitefield, “Age of the Earth What does the Bible Say,” 2011)
Consider Genesis 28:10-11, 19. Successive verses 10 and 11 state:
10 Jacob left Beersheba and set out for Harran. 11 When he reached a certain place, he stopped for the night because the sun had set. Taking one of the stones there, he put it under his head and lay down to sleep.
Easy to assume the “certain place” was close and these events are later that same day. Yet, verse 19 just happens to give further clarity as it notes the place is Bethel, which is about 60 miles away, and a reasonable estimate of elapsed time, compared to a similar journey given in Genesis 22:1-19, is about four days. Without the extra information in verse 19, we would have no idea of the elapsed time, but would likely assume no elapse in days between the successive verses 10 and 11.
Likewise, how much time passed between, “And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day (yom)” and the subsequent “and God said …” I personally do not know, and neither do you. We can assume this time interval is zero, but it is only an assumption. One has to go beyond what the Bible actually provides to assume zero lapse of time between those events.
Here is just one other example of a time period that we know a lot about, but the Bible did not focus on: the entire Maccabean period. While we know about this period through other historical records, who knows how many time periods like this the Bible simply does not account for in its concise revelation.
So, now what?
Here is the basic approach you may want to use when this issue comes up. Keep in mind we are to discuss issues with gentleness, respect and humility. And if someone challenges you, or you want to challenge someone in a logical and genuine way, just ask three basic questions, and be a good listener.
- How old do you think the Earth/Universe is?
- Why do you believe that? Where does the Bible give the age?
- Have you considered you have to add in your assumptions to God’s Word to claim you know YEC or OEC is biblical.
For those who may accept we cannot get a reliable age range from the Bible, but are still curious, the next article will provide how old I think the universe and Earth are.
Again, the answers I give are “Thus assumeth Scott” not with the authority or backing of “Thus saith the LORD.” I will provide only biblical reasons for my thoughts on the issue because the only people I am aware of who believe in YEC are in the church.
Admittedly, I do not fully cover arguments from both sides of the issue, but I will eventually answer all the challenges in the FAQ section. Just not a big priority as there are much more impactful and salvation-level issues I would rather cover first.
If you are hungry for more interesting information on this issue: here is a link to Christians supporting young Earth,[6] and here is a website by Christians supporting old Earth.[7] You can check out positions & demeanor from both sides: Hugh Ross vs Kent Hovind,[8] debate: Hugh Ross and Walter Kaiser vs Ken Ham and Jason Lisle.[9]
[1] For example, here is a link to the conclusion by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy, and a statement provided by Westminster Theological Seminary.
[2] Ussher, James. The Annals of the World, preface: “the entrance of the night preceding the 23rd day of Octob[er] in the year of the Julian [Period] 710.” In his preface, he further detailed his calculation, which led to a time of 6 p.m.
[3] R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, eds., Theological Wordbook
of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980), 1:74–75, 2:935–936
[4] Strong’s Concordance 1254, as cited by BibleHub: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/1254.htm
[5] John Millam, “The Genesis Genealogies”, Reasons to Believe, revised June 2010. https://reasons.org/explore/publications/articles/the-genesis-genealogies
[6] https://answersingenesis.org/search/?q=young%20earth
[7] https://reasons.org/?s=old+earth
[8]https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?&q=Hugh+Ross+vs+Kent+Hovind&&mid=98A86468658E61A8335C98A86468658E61A8335C&&FORM=VRDGAR
[9]https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hugh%20ross%20vs%20ken%20ham&view=detail&mid=7A8B970B45A18ABFC2667A8B970B45A18ABFC266&ajaxhist=0
