For whatever - your insult, and radioisotope dating

Hi,I am confused at this, perhaps you could clear it up for me? Where do you get the 13,000 years from?Thanks.Brian.

HI, thanks for the reply. OK, there seems to be a few problems with your counting that perhaps you could clarify for me.I am quite happy to go with a day being a thousand years to God, I have no problem with that. But the sun was created on day 4, which would make it, by your calculations, 10,000 years, that being 4 ‘God Days’ of a thousand years plus the 6000 of the genealogies.Also, if a day is like a thousand years to God then why isn’t a year like 365,000 years to God?Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that the universe is the 7 creation days plus 6000 x 365 days which would total 2 190 000, plus the 7000 years of creation week = 2 197 000 years? (I haven’t bothered about leap years because I hate maths!)I don’t see how you can have a day equalling a thousand years for one part of the Bible then suddenly taking a day to be 24 hours in the rest of the Bible, why the inconsistency?Thanks.Brian.

Hi, thanks again for the quick reply.I do not want to nitpick but your interpretation is in conflict with scripture. To believe that the sun became a star on the first day is contrary to what the Bible says, it specifically says that the sun didnt become a star until the 4th day. Remember the Bible says God 'created' the sun on day 4 the sun is a star, so if was created on day one, why create it again on day 4?One fatal flaw for your theory about dating the age of man is that man was created on day 6, according to your theory the 7th day would have been a thousand years, yet Adam died aged 930 years, he would have died before God placed him in Eden.There are quite a few other things wrong with this post, but as you say this is your interpretation of the Bible text then I cannot argue with it, you can interpret it any way you wish, it is your faith not mine.What I can say is that I haven't heard this interpretation before and that there are internal errors in your interpretation, and I think that your interpretation is a very unusual one, but it is up to you what you want to believe.Thanks for answering my questions.Brian.