Science dates the earth at 4.54 billion years old.

Also, the modern human species at around 200,000 years old with a split at that time from neanderthals - considered very different than modern humans.

There seems to be over a 4 billion year gap before humans and the earth.

How do Christan's resolve this?

If Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day, are they around 4 billion years old and of a different species?

Thank You.

  • 1
    You'll likely have different answers from young-earth and old-earth creationists. I would assume you're looking for an old-earth perspective based on the first sentence, but it should probably be made explicit.
    – Ryan Frame
    Commented Jul 5, 2013 at 20:40
  • 1
    Also, "are Adam and Eve around 4 billion years..." is too long. You're probably looking for somewhere between 1.5 million to 800,000(?).
    – Ryan Frame
    Commented Jul 5, 2013 at 20:46
  • 2
    please be sure to provide a comment for that down vote, any information is appreciated to why this is a bad question as it will indirectly help with the question, thank you. Commented Jul 5, 2013 at 22:03
  • 2
    For what it's worth, 4 billion years ago the Earth's surface temperature was about 450 °F. There was no life yet then.
    – Chelonian
    Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 5:03
  • 1
    First of all, the term "species" in its modern sense to mean "a population of reproducing and viable organisms among each other" would be foreign to the writers of Genesis; keep in mind that Genesis is a traditional narrative. Second of all, the so-called "Adam and Eve" may be a poetic way to refer to all of humanity and its connectedness, not two actual beings that existed and gave rise to everyone today.
    – Double U
    Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 13:04

3 Answers 3


Short answer - YES! Long answer - read below :)

You will find many science based articles that answer this question at creation.com . I am a recently converted atheist who was unable to reconcile evolution with the bible as a literal account. I believed the evolution account for 40 years.

The reason I no longer believe it is because I had an experience that moved me to believe in Jesus Christ as my Saviour (no it was not through near death or an evangelist experience, it was far more mundane, but that is another story).

I studied the bible and examined arguments for and against the Genesis account of Creation. I came to the conclusion that if I believe one part of the Bible as literal truth then I must also believe the whole thing. For a while I tried to wiggle out of the literal 6 days of creation, Adam and Eve and Noah's flood. I really wanted to believe the old earth or intelligent design argument but in the end science just does not support evolution. Evolution may in fact be the greatest hoax on earth but I invite you to read the various arguments for yourself.

Returning to your question. The Bible traces the ancestry of Jesus back to Adam, first in Genesis then in Matthew. Unless you think maybe Jesus was not a "modern human" (as opposed to his divine nature) nor any of the figures in his ancestry then sure you can imagine Adam and Eve were not "modern humans" but were some species of hominid along the "evolutionary chain". However, look at what the Bible tells us about Adam and Eve and their offspring, they sound exactly like you and I and they farmed the land.

My personal interpretation of the Bible is centered on one fact: I absolutely believe that a man named Jesus was crucified and raised from the dead about 2000 years ago. Believing that to be true I can then believe all the rest to be true because of the prophesies embedded in the texts and historical concurrences with many of them.

With love and faith Caz

  • 1
    The other option is to interpret Genesis in a way an early human would understand it, and compare Genesis to other ancient creation narratives. Do you think such a human would really have a concept of "species" in its modern sense? Why is that Creationist Christians must interpret Genesis as the "literal truth" while they interpret other narratives as "merely myths and therefore false". Perhaps, it is important to understand the power and nature of story and its way of changing beliefs and understanding the world around us.
    – Double U
    Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 13:12
  • @Caz: thaks for the answer, I see how you personally got to it. However I ask, what was your experience that brought you to Jesus and also, "if I believe one part of the Bible as literal truth then I must also believe the whole thing." - Why is that? most Christians believe both literal and figurative sections exist in parallel, so why is this so different for you? Commented Jul 8, 2013 at 16:28

Different groups of Christians resolve this in different ways.

A young-earth creationist would say the earth isn't really 4.5 billion years old. Adam and Eve were created along with everything else around 6,000 years ago.

An old-earth creationist would accept the 4.5 billion year age of the earth, but would deny that humans are descended from another species. God created Adam and Eve several hundreds of thousands of years ago as a separate and unique species.

A theistic evolutionist would read the story of Adam and Eve as an allegory or a myth. Several hundreds of thousands of years ago, God imbued humans with a soul and gave us moral accountability. Adam and Eve represent God's relationship with each of us.


As a young Earth creationist I see it this way:

God stretched out the heavens like a curtain on Day 4 (Isaiah 42:5) causing time dilation; generating billions of years' worth of starlight into the heavens in 24 hours of Earth time; to establish a clock that could run forever and be seen from the Earth from the beginning.(Genesis 1:14)

God caused a worldwide flood (Genesis 7) involving a second stretching of the heavens (rapid acceleration of the expansion rate) that resulted in accelerated nuclear decay, excess internal Earth heating, runaway plate tectonics (the bursting of the fountains of the deep), and extraterrestrial activity including possible planet fragmentation and asteroid bombardment of the planets in our solar system. The fossil record I interpret as a record of the progressive burial of ecosystems by the advance of floodwater tsunamis.

Neanderthals, Homo Erectus, and archaic Homo Sapiens I interpret as post-Flood humans whose features and measured bone-growth rates for their skulls are in line with the generations after the flood which had long life spans (Genesis 11). Four generations had lifespans of 450 years, then 3 generations had lifespans of 250 years. The rapid genetic changes have leveled off to a max of about 120. I view the Australopithecines as an extinct form of ape, likely tree-dwelling due to their 15 degree valgus angle. (Humans and spider monkeys have a 9 degree angle, ground-dwelling apes have a 0 degree angle). The Australopithecines likely went extinct as the Sahara went from jungle to savannah to desert after the Flood.

So Adam and Eve would be the same species, but with far less harmful mutations and lifespans in the 950 year range. All peoples on Earth now would be descended from Noah and his 3 sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .