Age of Earth / Age of Universe

by Shepherd Book 10 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Shepherd Book

  Here's my understanding of the Watchtower's teachings through the years -

  1. First they taught that the Universe and the Earth were created 6,000 years ago in a single week.

  2. Then they taught that the Universe was created at some unspecified point in the past, and that each of the six creative "days" was 6,000 years long.

  3. Now they teach that the Universe was created at some unspecified point in the past, and that each of the six creative "days" was millions of years long.

  So here are my questions: I know that point #2 (above) is promoted in the Paradise Lost book, and I know that point #3 (above) is promoted in the Life-How Did it Get Here-By Evolution or By Creation book. But when did they shift from teaching #2 to teaching #3? And did they, really, ever teach #1? If so, when did they switch to #2?

  Any help would be greatly appreciated (I don't have many old pubs to check this myself).
• 

  Nathan Natas

  I'm not sure that point #3 is correct:

  How Long Is a Genesis “Day”?

  4 Many consider the word “day” used in Genesis chapter 1 to mean 24 hours. However, in Genesis 1:5 God himself is said to divide day into a smaller period of time, calling just the light portion “day.” In Genesis 2:4 all the creative periods are called one “day”: “This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day [all six creative periods] that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.”

  5 The Hebrew word yohm, translated “day,” can mean different lengths of time. Among the meanings possible, William Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies includes the following: “A day; it is frequently put for time in general, or for a long time; a whole period under consideration . . . Day is also put for a particular season or time when any extraordinary event happens.”1 This last sentence appears to fit the creative “days,” for certainly they were periods when extraordinary events were described as happening. It also allows for periods much longer than 24 hours.

  6 Genesis chapter 1 uses the expressions “evening” and “morning” relative to the creative periods. Does this not indicate that they were 24 hours long? Not necessarily. In some places people often refer to a man’s lifetime as his “day.” They speak of “my father’s day” or “in Shakespeare’s day.” They may divide up that lifetime “day,” saying “in the morning [or dawn] of his life” or “in the evening [or twilight] of his life.” So ‘evening and morning’ in Genesis chapter 1 does not limit the meaning to a literal 24 hours.

  7 “Day” as used in the Bible can include summer and winter, the passing of seasons. (Zechariah 14:8) “The day of harvest” involves many days. (Compare Proverbs 25:13 and Genesis 30:14.) A thousand years are likened to a day. (Psalm 90:4; 2 Peter 3:8, 10) “Judgment Day” covers many years. (Matthew 10:15; 11:22-24) It would seem reasonable that the “days” of Genesis could likewise have embraced long periods of time—millenniums. What, then, took place during those creative eras? Is the Bible’s account of them scientific? Following is a review of these “days” as expressed in Genesis.

  (...)

  30 The foregoing is presented to help us understand what Genesis says. And this quite realistic account indicates that the creative process continued throughout a period of, not just 144 hours (6 × 24), but over many millenniums of time.

  - Life—How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation? (1985), chapter 3

  A millennium is a thousand years, not a million years, so the teaching that the creative days were thousands of years long still stands, I think.
• 

  Kudra

  There was an Awake last fall (on birds and evolution I think) that stated the "millions of years for each creative day" idea.

  The same article deliberately (beacause the real information IS freely available) distorted the record on the fossil Archeopteryx.

  If someone could find that post from last year or re-post the Awake article it would be great. I tried looking for that same post from last on the Archeopteryx in the Awake year a week or so ago but couldn't find it...
• 

  Nathan Natas

  Ruterford's 1927 book CREATION says this about the length of the creative days in chapter 2:

  When did that period of time begin? The Scriptures divide the creative work into seven days, or periods of time. While God could have done this work in seven days of twenty-four hours each, had he so desired, the facts show that he did not do so, but that the term "day" is a period of time covering many centuries. This creative period has no reference to a twenty-four-hour day. Since the Lord has divided the creative periods into seven it is reasonable that these creative days, or periods of time, are of equal length.
• 

  Nathan Natas

  Russell's 1914 PHOTODRAMA OF CREATION says

  "Let there be light! and there was light." Thus, briefly, is summed up the result of the 7,000 years, styled the First Day.

  So it seems unlikely that Russell ever taught a 24 hour creative day. In my opinion, this was probably due to the influence of his wife, Maria, who was much more well-versed on matters of astronomy and astrophysics. She would have been able to show Charles that a 24 hour interpretation of the creative days was unnecessary.
• 

  Alpaca

  The WT teachings about the length of the creative days and when life began on earth was one of the lynchpin issues that made me question everything.

  I left in 1997 after a 35+ year association with the BORG. My Mom started studying with the Dubs when I was about 4 years old (1960).

  As I recall (my memory of the exact WT stance could be a little rusty on this), at the time I left, the 7 creative days were considered to each be 7,000 years long. So, at the end of the 6th creative day, by the time EVE was created, 42,000 years had elapsed. The 6,000 year anniversary of Adam's creation was 1975. When the Big "A" didn't happen in 1975 the WT conjectured that there was some unknown period of time between Adam's creation and Eve's creation, but the 7th creative day began after both of them had been created. The 7th creative day has now been running for 6,000+ years. The final 1,000 year period of the 7th creative day was supposed to be Christ's millenial reign, thus completing 49,000 years for the 7 creative days.

  Even if you stretch credulity to say that life on earth has existed on earth for 50,000 + years, you would still come up very short with the scientific evidence. According to WT calculations, if life started on the 3rd creative day, it means that life on earth has been here for a maximum of 34,000 years.

  Anyway the WT cuts it, they are going to be stuck trying to rectify the descrepancies in Bible chronology and the facts of science. The whole exercise is absolutely ridiculous.
• 

  Alpaca

  I should add that the WT tried to overcome some of the chronology problems by stating that the universe and the earth existed for some unknown length of time before Jehovah began the "creative days" to prepare the earth for humans.

  The whole thing is still absolutely ridiculous.
• 

  garybuss

  
  Reasoning From The Scriptures 1989 p. 88 Creation
  Was all physical creation accomplished in just six days sometime within the past 6,000 to 10,000 years?
  The facts disagree with such a conclusion: (1) Light from the Andromeda nebula can be seen on a clear night in the northern hemisphere. It takes about 2,000,000 years for that light to reach the earth, indicating that the universe must be at least millions of years old. (2) End products of radioactive decay in rocks in the earth testify that some rock formations have been undisturbed for billions of years.
  
  
  "Consider the relationship between Jehovah and Jesus. They were together in heaven for perhaps billions of years."
  The Watchtower, August 15, 2005
  Page 27, Paragraph 15
  
  
  
• 

  Shepherd Book

  These are all excellent quotes. Thanks very much.

  Alpaca - yeah, I think the Society's stance on Genesis 1 - 10 causes many to doubt & eventually leave.

  Nathan - thanks, I totally forgot about that book. A quick search on Google revealed that it's available as a scan.
• 

  stillajwexelder

  it is extremely difficult unless you are a diehard idiot to dispute scientific fact