The Age of Earth: A Scientifically Religious View

The age of the earth according to science, and the age of the earth according to certain religious sects is indeed in conflict. Although it has not always been true personally, this conflict is resolved in my case. It is a topic in which I would like to spend hours researching and discussing, but I have chosen a few main points of truth to shed light on my viewpoint below, though I don't claim to do this topic justice in fullness in any way.

Within the LDS faith, prominent voices, including those of Prophets, Seers, and Revelators such as Brigham Young, and expert Mormon scientists such as Henry Eyring support truth circumscribed in one great whole, that religion and science actually do not contradict each other when doctrine is truly understood. This is compared to a conflicting viewpoint of some members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and those of millions of Christians worldwide that take the biblical timeline to be literal and final in meaning.

A simple understanding of how the Bible was compiled, and the process in which it has been translated (multiple times) leads a seeker of truth to understand that the message God intends to reach us concerning the creation in scriptural text, is not that of a geological timeline. Rather, it is to highlight in simplified terms the major events leading to his ultimate creation: mankind. In summary, my view supports this view of the Bible (especially the Old Testament), AND supports the findings of science, for surely truth is truth, no matter how it is found. It will one day be clear that the truths of God's loving creation, and the truths of science come together beautifully. This understanding will be as mind blowing as an iPad would be to someone who lived in Joseph Smith's time. We simply do not understand the science God does. However, the following are reasons I believe as I do. These are some of the quotes I've found most helpful in coming to this conclusion:




Brigham Young stated: "In these respects we differ from the Christian world, for our religion will not clash with or contradict the facts of science in any particular...whether the Lord found the earth empty and void, whether he made it out of nothing or out of the rude elements; or whether he made it in six days or in as many millions of years, is and will remain a matter of speculation in the minds of men unless he give revelation on the subject. If we understood the process of creation there would be no mystery about it, it would be all reasonable and plain, for there is no mystery except to the ignorant."

Concerning scientific truth and religion Henry Eyring stated: "[In both science and religion,] you set up some basic postulates from your experience or your experiments and then from that you start making deductions, but everything that matters is based upon things you accept as true. When a man says he will believe in religion if you prove it, it is like asking you to prove there are electrons. Proof depends upon your premises….Every proof in science depends on the postulates one accepts. The same is true of religion. The certitude one has about the existence of God ultimately comes from personal experience, the experience of others, or logical deductions from the postulates one accepts. People sometimes get the idea that science and religion are different, but they are not different at all. There is nothing in science that does not hinge on some primitive constructs you take for granted. What is an electron? I can tell you some things about the electron we have learned from experiment, and if you accept these things, you will be able to make predictions. But ultimately you will always get back to postulates.I am certain in my own mind of the truthfulness of the gospel, but I can only communicate that assurance to you if you accept my postulates."

Chapter 8 from Science and Mormonism, written by Melvin A. and M. Garfield Cook, Mormon Chemist and Physicists states this specifically concerning interpretations of LDS scientist concerning Biblical and geological time: "Two general schools of thought emerge from an analysis of the literature and public statements of this group: one that biblical and geologic time are really essentially in agreement (when the Bible is properly interpreted) and the other, exactly the opposite, that they are in sharp disagreement. There are apparently no LDS scholars that interpret the 'day' in the account of the creation as an earth-day or 24 hours. Those that take Bible history to be literal, generally use modern revelation to define the 'day' as '1000' years of our time. The majority appear, however, to prefer the interpretation that the 'day of the Lord' is really an indefinite (but long) period of time. Most, if not all, LDS geologists assign to it something like the millions of years of geologic periods. The consensus among this group is in effect that organic evolution was the mechanism of creation." 

My favorite quote, however, comes from John A. Widtsoe, a Mormon and genius, that best describes my view: 



"The scientific doctrine of the great age of the earth, rests largely upon the evidence of the orderly arrangement of plant and animal fossils in the rocks constituting the upper portion of the earth’s crust. Those who hold to the six day theory of creation, claim that in accordance with the above quotation from the Prophet Joseph, these stratilied rocks, containing fossils, are fragments of other worlds, and do not represent processes that have taken place on this earth. Why fossils may have been formed on other worlds, but not on the earth, is nearly as difficult to understand as the doctrine that living, intelligent beings are found only on the earth. Modern science has developed a doctrine like that of Joseph Smith, which teaches that heavenly bodies may be made up of fragments of destroyed worlds, but the parts of destroyed worlds which go to build new heavenly bodies are minute, even microscopic in size. There are numerous strong evidences against the view that large sections of other worlds were brought together to form this earth (see an article by Dr. J. E. Talmage, Improvement Era vol 7, p 481). Primarily, it would not be the way of nature, as we know it. God, who is nature's master, does his work in a natural manner.... The more the matter is carefully examined, the firmer grows the belief that the creation of the earth occupied immense time periods, the exact length of which is not yet given to man to know. This view does not in any way discredit the book of books, the Holy Bible. The Bible must be read with understanding minds; as :1 hook, it must no more be held to a word. than a man desires so to be held. By verse and chapter and book, the Bible will be found an accurate, inspired record of the most wonderful and valuable events and doctrines of the world. However, it must not be forgotten that the Apostle Paul has reminded us that “the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made.” God reveals himself in nature; and when nature is read understandingly God may thereby in part be comprehended. There is no conflict between the story of the rocks and the Bible, except as man has made it. Finally, it must be said that so far as living a correct gospel life is concerned, it matters little whether or not we know the time God consumed in making the earth a fit habitation for man."

In my words, it's okay for members of the Church to believe in the truths of science as they continue to evolve. We must seek truth, as the Lord has commanded, with a remembrance of His love, and Plan for us, and trust that all things will be revealed and known in due time. Not believing in the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because every answer is not available to every question would be comparable to a scientist saying he does not believe in science because every theory has not yet been proven. Truth takes work, time, and revelation through both experimentation and divine help.