Any GOP potential 2016 candidate who dares to stick their neck out are going to be riduculed as religious zealots.The Catholic Church is doing us no favors by claiming Christ was actually born 4 centuries before he was born.How did they come up with AD and BC on the calendar with a 4 century gap? What´s happening is this feeds the left´s charges that Christi s a hoax and if you believe in Him then you´re an out of touch kook.

This country is becoming so hedonistic that there aren´t enough people of faith left to battle the left´s false gods of government and materialism.

Liberals seem to be taking over the consumer economy in this country which is puzzling as to where they´re getting the money for it.Most of them don´t want to work but seem to have more disposable income than people who do.

Don´t know where you saw that #1, but I saw various accounts of 2-6 years not centuries.

Question for reporters: Before there was a sun, how lomg was a day? Before man defined a unit of time, did hours minutes and seconds exist? If something happens, an event for which no previous comparable event has been recorded, how do you define it?

What is a day to God? How do illiterate shepherds define or classify events, so that other illiterate shepherds can understand it?

Religious writings do not necessarily reflect our ´chop-chop, this is a defined unit´ lives. They may reflect experiences and circumstances familiar to the write and his audience. Therefore, the ´camel through the eye of a needle´ may speak of a narrow postern gateway into Jerusalem, known as the ´Needle´s Eye´, rather than an actual needle.

We don´t know. And it doesn´t matter, except for how it reflects on our choices and behavior.

Tell me - How does the Creation story affect our behavior, except to acknowledge that God is so far beyond our understanding that we cannot define or limit him? And if God did create everything in 144 hours, how could any scientist tell? Everything they ´measure´ is done by projecting their current observations of various physical existence into the past. How is this valid even by scientific standards? If this were a poll, they would be using a sample of at best 200 years to estimate 13 billion (Estimated age of the Universe). One part in 65,000,000. How is that accurate?

Good one #3. That reply would have some leftie reporter talking to himself.

What a great thread to wake up to. I don’t think GQ’s level of erudition would fare well among Ldotters.

I confess I´m not following the issue very well here. What does believing the Biblical account in Genesis have to do with the age of the earth? Though some might fuss about a creation that took place over a period of six days, what does that have to do with geologic age?

I suspect the underlying question, not mentioned directly in the article, has to do with Archbishop Usher´s conclusion that the earth is only 6,000 years old. That, however, is not a ´truth´ declared by the bible. In no place does the bible mention the age of the earth.

Rather, Archbishop Usher, using the genealogical tables in the Old Testament, came up with the 6,000 year figure. Unfortunately, the genealogical tables were never intended to be measures of time, but of pedigree. Few modern biblical scholars would agree to such a use of the scriptures.

Rubio´s answer:

That is a stupid question. Didn´t you really want to ask me why our economy is in the crapper and democrats do not have a clue how to create jobs?

On the age of the universe, one might also consult the Hindus, whose civilization is older than ours, who say the life span for the universe is 314,159,000,000,000 solar years. Who knows what measurement standards they used.

I´d say, "I don´t know and that question has no bearing on politics. Let´s go to a different topic"

The disturbing issue here is why Rubio would be so foolish/vain/naive/stupid - as to accept an invitation to be interviewed by GQ in the first place.

Did he really think he was so cool, that GQ would like him? Howe vain. Arrogant. Absurd.

The morphing into the USSR is near completion.

Good thinking #3.

The appropriate answer to any of these gotcha questions is: That´s a stupid question. Next?"

#1, the Gospel of Matthew says that Jesus was born under the reign of King Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC. So Jesus had to have been born before 4 BC. According to the Gospel of Luke, Jesus was "about thirty years old" shortly after “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar." Tiberius became emperor in AD 14. A close fit, but not exact. That and a few more aprox references yield Jesus being born around 6 BC.

I was taught this in grade school 50 years ago. It´s not shocking, not scandalous, not news: it´s been known for centuries.

No. 15 has it right. A monk´s error in figuring the year 1 A.D. (there was no year 0 -- the year before was 1 B.C.) has been carried down for centuries. So if you think there´s something transcendent about ´´the turn of the century´´ (or the millennium) you had best recalculate. And what does it matter? Nothing at all. The fact of His birth, life, death and resurrection is what counts.

And about that gotcha question: here´s one way to answer:

"By using the radiometric dating system on the Diablo Canyon meteorite, geologists can say the Earth is 4.54 billion years old. That means that if the United States went $3000 further in debt each year since the beginning of the world, we´d be LESS in debt than we are right now, at $16 trillion dollars. Why don´t you guys start asking us about something relevant, like the national debt?"

Right on # 17.

My theory is that couldn´t an infinite G-d squeeze 4.5 billion years into 1/4.5 billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a second.

But I like #17´s answer better. That´s a great answer.

it is interesting in this context to recall the issue of the steady state universe, which was for a while the compelled scientific position in the USSR. somebody (Stalin?) thought that people believed the universe had a beginning, any beginning, Big Bang e.g., then they would believe in God.

I side with scientific evidence over religious scripture. The age of the earth is stated no place in the Bible. It has merely been interpolated (wrongly) by those who would also predict the date of the Second Coming. Silly rabbits.

The "scientific evidence" also states there is global warming. I trust the Bible, not some science con job.

To answer #6. There are some "creation scientists" who claim the earth is only 6,000 years old, because that´s how far back the Biblical record goes, as far as recorded humanity.
No one knows the age of the earth OR universe. Understand the Angelic Conflict and you know a previous creation existed in a perfect universe created for THEM, not us. That creation could have gone on for billions of years before mankind. Rebellious Satan took one third of all angels with him, and were condemned to the Lake of Fire created for them. Satan appealed the conviction, and God in His fairness, created man to resolve the conflict. Adam and the woman (she wasn´t called Eve until after she sinned) in the Garden could have existed there, sinless, for a million years or more! No time-line is given in Scripture.

Christian "creationists" can´t square with the Big Bang, however, the entire universe was created by God complete, perfect, and instantly, but rebellious angels trashed it. They also can´t accept that the earth is more than 6,000 years old. Understand the "Gap Theory" between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 and you will find no conflict between Physical Science and the Bible.

As Scripture says--

"Choose this day whom you will serve...as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord"

and it ain´t Barack Hussein Obama.