Scientific methods for measuring the age of the universe rest on the assumption that "what has been will be"-that the rate of physical change in the universe has remained constant. In reality, leading physicists acknowledge that we have no way of knowing what conditions prevailed in earlier epochs, or how they affected changes in matter. In light of this, the scientific claim regarding the age of the universe amounts to little more than speculation.
“How can Judaism claim that the world is only about 5,700 years old? After all, there is scientific proof that the world was created billions of years ago “!This is one of the most frequently asked questions. The vast gap between the scientific claim and the Jewish claim regarding the age of the universe has led many to conclude that Judaism has simply been “caught in its error,” and from there to the sweeping conclusion that Judaism should not be given much weight in our lives. So let us hear, once and for all, what Judaism has to say on the matter.
The scientific theory widely accepted today holds that the universe was created about 13.8 billion years ago, while the Torah explains that this occurred roughly 5,783 years ago (as of the year 5783 in the Jewish calendar, corresponding to 2023). In fact, it was only about sixty years ago that scientists came to the conclusion that the universe was created at a specific point in time, rather than having existed eternally, as had long been assumed. Throughout most of history, the prevailing scientific view was that the universe had always existed. Aristotle, the Greek philosopher whose influence dominated the Middle Ages, argued that something non-material could not turn into material reality out of nothing; therefore, the unavoidable conclusion was that the universe is eternal. This remained the scientific consensus until the early twentieth century. Many scholars openly mocked the idea that the world had been created at some point in time-it simply sounded utterly implausible.
Only in the 1960s did the Big Bang theory gain widespread acceptance among scientists. According to this theory, the universe came into being through the explosion of an immense concentration of energy, known as the “singularity.” In many respects, the principles of this theory bear a striking resemblance to the account of Creation described in the Book of Genesis (a parallel explored in depth in Bereishit Bara by Prof. Nathan Aviezer, which examines the correspondence between the Torah’s descriptions and those of modern science).
According to the Big Bang theory, this explosion produced an immense shockwave and extreme heat, leading to the formation of the first matter. From the moment of creation, the universe began expanding and has continued to expand ever since. At the instant of the initial explosion, cosmic background radiation spread throughout space and remains present everywhere in the universe to this day. This radiation is the sole remnant of that primordial event, and as it “moves farther” from the point of the original explosion, its temperature cools. Measuring the temperature of cosmic background radiation is currently the primary method used to estimate how much time has passed since the Big Bang. Additional, though less precise, methods include radiometric dating and calculations based on the rate at which galaxies are moving away from the Milky Way and their distance from it.
Today, the prevailing scientific view is that the universe is about 14 billion years old. The Torah, by contrast, teaches that the world was created only 5,786 years ago-and we will now see how this claim can be reconciled with scientific observations as well.
The Problem with Calculating the Age of the Universe
The main problem with the scientific calculation of the age of the universe lies in its underlying assumption. In order to calculate the rate of cosmic radiation (or temperature, or any other parameter), scientists must assume that the laws of nature have not changed since the Big Bang. This principle, known as the “principle of uniformity,” holds that the laws of nature today are identical to those that have always existed-such as the strength of gravity, the behavior of matter at a given temperature, the speed of light, air pressure, and so on. Without this assumption, no scientific investigation or measurement relating to the moment of Creation has any meaning. If the measured parameter has changed over time, it cannot be used to determine the age of the universe.
Therefore, if the rate of processes and the flow of time at the beginning of Creation were very different from their rate today, there is no difficulty at all in reconciling the Torah’s account of the age of the world. Creation in its earliest stages unfolded at an entirely different pace-much faster, by way of analogy, like the development of a newborn infant. The pace of the world today is far slower, more akin to that of an adult. Accelerated processes took place during the initial moments of Creation, so that events occurred at a much faster rate than they do today, as explained by Prof. Nathan Aviezer:
“According to the accepted Big Bang theory, a long series of dramatic cosmological developments took place within an extremely short period, right at the very beginning of the universe. This point was emphasized by Professor Steven Weinberg, who chose to title his book on modern cosmology The First Three Minutes. Professor Weinberg required 151 pages to describe the momentous cosmological transformations that occurred in just three minutes!” (Bereishit Bara, Prof. Nathan Aviezer, p. 26)
Jewish tradition speaks of entirely different conditions prevailing at different stages of Creation. For example, in the portion of Noah, the Torah describes a flood that engulfed the world. After the Flood, which lasted forty consecutive days, a divine promise was made that such an event would never recur: “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night shall not cease” (Genesis 8:22).
From this verse, it may be understood that the Flood was not merely an episode of heavy rain, but that the very order of nature-including the order of time-was fundamentally altered: the length of the day, the seasons of the year, and even the temperature (see Rashi’s commentary on this verse). Science has no way of calculating the changes that occurred then, especially since almost no trace of those events remains today, aside from their mention in the Torah.
Look How Your Baby Has Grown!
You know those aunts who meet a sweet little child from the family whom they haven’t seen in two years? What do they immediately say? “Wow, how you’ve grown! I remember you just yesterday-so small!”
If you see a one-day-old baby and then meet him again at the age of one year, you would hardly recognize him. He looks completely different-far more developed and much larger than on the day he was born. A one-year-old infant grows about 25 centimeters during the first year of life. By contrast, if you meet a 50-year-old man and then see him again a year later at age 51, he will likely look exactly the same. He certainly won’t have grown another 25 centimeters. In other words, the rate of physical development changes dramatically between the beginning of life and later stages.
What do scientists do when they examine the age of the universe? They measure the rate of change of physical findings in their present state and assume that this rate of change has always been constant. Based on this assumption, it is hardly surprising that they arrive at such an enormous age for the universe.
To illustrate this, let us take a 17-year-old teenager and measure his growth rate. We discover that over the past year, he has grown 1 centimeter. If we adopt the scientific assumption that the rate of change is constant, we would establish as a “scientific fact” that a human being grows 1 centimeter every year.
Now take a baby who was born at an average height of 50 centimeters, and measure him again at the age of two, when his height is 87 centimeters. We determine that his total growth was 37 centimeters. If we now attempt to determine the baby’s age based on the scientific approach to age calculation, we would conclude that this baby-who has grown 37 centimeters-is no less than 37 years old! After all, according to the “findings,” we assumed that a human being grows 1 centimeter per year.
Judaism argues that the rate of processes at the beginning of Creation was vastly different from the rate today, and that the flow of time itself was different. A single day today is not equivalent to a single day at the dawn of Creation. Creation unfolded at an entirely different pace-much faster, like a newborn in its earliest days. Today’s pace is much slower, like that of an adult. For this reason, science arrives at an age of the universe that is far greater than that claimed by Judaism.
Scientists, in their efforts to determine the age of the universe, measure rates of change as they exist today and assume that those rates have always been constant. Under this assumption, it is no wonder that the age of the universe appears so vast. It is therefore clear that the principle of uniformity is problematic as a basis for determining the age of the world.
“I Was Born Grown”
Another explanation offered by Judaism to resolve the question of the age of the universe is that science assumes Creation developed from a state of absolute zero, whereas the Torah teaches that the world was created by God in a mature state-appearing developed and complete. The Oral Torah states: “All the works of Creation were created in their full stature” (Chullin 60a). That is, the first human being was not created as a helpless nursing infant, but as a fully developed adult, twenty years old. The same applies to animals and plants, which were created in their mature forms. This fact also explains why science concludes that the universe is far older than it truly is.
Returning to the analogy above: the baby was not born with a height of zero centimeters, but with an initial height of 50 centimeters. Thus, when we calculate his growth from birth to age two (87 centimeters), we find that he grew by 37 centimeters. Similarly, Judaism maintains that Creation did not begin from zero, but from a mature state.
Science, however, assumes that Creation began from nothing, and therefore, in calculating the age of the universe, it relies on the assumption that there was absolutely nothing at the moment of Creation. Based on the gap between the current state and an assumed zero state, science calculates the age of the universe. If we were to calculate the baby’s age based on the scientific assumptions-that the initial state was zero and that the rate of change at the beginning of life was identical to the current rate-we would conclude that a two-year-old baby who is 87 centimeters tall is no less than 87 years old.
In Conclusion
None of us was present at the earliest moments of the universe, nor in the years that followed. In light of this, there is no necessity to assume that the conditions prevailing in Creation today are identical to those that prevailed in the past. Consequently, researchers-no matter how wise or eminent-cannot determine the age of the universe as an absolute fact without relying on purely theoretical assumptions.
The method most commonly used today to date fossils and similar remains is the radiometric measurement of carbon-14. This substance is found in all living organisms at a similar concentration and decays at a constant rate. Measuring the amount of carbon-14 remaining in a fossil supposedly makes it possible to determine, more or less, how long ago the organism died. However, this method has a significant drawback: there is no way to be certain that the rate of decay truly remained constant throughout all those years. This means that once again we are relying on an unverified assumption, since it is entirely possible that significant changes occurred in the distant past that affected the rate of decay.
Indeed, many scientists question the reliability of radiometric dating-the most prominent among them being Paul Dirac, one of the leading physicists of the twentieth century. As Professor Moshe Trop writes at the end of his book The Riddle of Existence:
“There are many question marks regarding the reliability of radiometric tests. It turns out that in several types of rocks, the expected decay series does not produce the residual elements that should be found in the rocks… Lava rocks whose age is known from historical records have yielded (in tests) entirely unrealistic ages. Reports from all over the world describe young rocks, only a few hundred years old, behaving as though their ages were on the order of millions or even billions of years.”
.
Another explanation that reconciles the gap between the scientific view and the Torah’s account is based on the fact that the Hebrew calendar does not count years from the creation of the universe, but from the creation of humankind, which took place on the sixth day, at the completion of Creation.
So what were the days of Creation like before the creation of humanity? Each “day” was in fact a period extending over a very long span of time. In other words, everything we know in Creation-galaxies, matter, animals, and plants-according to this view, came into being over six extended epochs, referred to in the Torah as “six days.” Only when the world reached an appropriate level of maturity, about 5,800 years ago, was humanity created-a rational being endowed with a spiritual soul.
Indeed, historians determine that the earliest civilizations known to us began more or less at this time, marking the sudden appearance of a new entity in Creation: the human being.
This idea puts to rest the claim that the question of the age of the universe poses a contradiction to Jewish faith. On the contrary, these two beliefs-the universe being billions of years old and faith in the Torah-can coexist side by side.
The scientific method used to determine the age of the universe is called extrapolation-that is, drawing estimated conclusions about the past based on certain data available in the present (such as fossils and similar findings).
An example that illustrates the problem with partial observations is the growth rate of bamboo. This plant does not grow at all for several months, and then suddenly enters a remarkable growth spurt, reaching a rate of up to an entire meter in a single day. If we observe bamboo during its “dormant” periods, it may appear to have lost its ability to grow altogether. But if we observe it during its growth phase, we might conclude that it could reach a height of 30 meters in a single month.
In reality, both inferred conclusions are incorrect-because the growth rate of bamboo changes over time. The analogy is clear: extrapolation can easily mislead our understanding of reality.
If the theories that attempt to explain the origin and age of the universe are so fragile, how did they arise in the first place? Professor Jeremiah Branover addresses this question:
“It is human nature to seek an explanation for everything around us. And any theory-even one that does not fit particularly well-is better than none, at least until a better explanation is found.
One might ask: in the absence of another coherent theory, why is the account of Creation not accepted by scientists as it is written in the Torah? The answer to this question is also: human nature. It is a natural human ambition to invent and to be original. Accepting what is written in the Bible deprives a person of the opportunity to demonstrate analytical and inductive ingenuity in this area. Therefore, the scientist who ignores what is stated in the Bible must invent reasons to ‘justify’ doing so, and finds them by classifying the biblical account alongside ancient and primitive mythology, since it cannot be argued against on a scientific basis.” (From Faith and Science, Prof. Jeremiah Branover)
The Torah describes the entire story of Creation in just thirty-four verses-a small space that contains a great deal. These verses are rich in wisdom and profound secrets, and therefore should not be understood in a purely literal way. Here is one example:
At the end of each day of Creation, God says, “And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” A day, as we know, is the completion of the Earth’s rotation on its axis, during which part of the time we face the sun (daytime) and part of the time we do not (night). Yet the Torah describes the first, second, and third days, while stating that the luminaries themselves-the sun and the moon-were created only on the fourth day. How, then, were days measured before there were luminaries in the sky?
In the Talmud, the study of the physical wisdom of Creation is called Ma’aseh Bereishit (“the Work of Creation”) and is considered part of the tradition of mystical teaching, which explains such ideas in concepts that are not familiar to us.
An additional explanation, which may help make this more accessible, is as follows: On the first day of Creation, God created the capacity for illumination independently of the heavenly bodies-the very possibility of light itself. Thus, there was already a distinction between light and darkness within a day, even though the sun and the moon had not yet been created. The Torah’s description of the first day reads:
“And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good, and God separated the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night” (Genesis 1:3-5).
Nachmanides (the Ramban) explains that regarding the creation of this light, the phrase “and it was so” (vayehi chen) does not appear, as it does with the other creations, because this light was not intended to illuminate throughout all the days of the world like the other created entities, which were established permanently. Only on the fourth day, when the luminaries-the sun and the moon-were created, was the function of illumination entrusted to them, enabling the distinction between day and night. Since these luminaries were fixed and enduring, unlike the temporary light of the first day, the Torah says of them, “and it was so.”
The method most commonly used today to date fossils and similar remains is the radiometric measurement of carbon-14. This substance is found in all living organisms at a similar concentration and decays at a constant rate. Measuring the amount of carbon-14 remaining in a fossil supposedly makes it possible to determine, more or less, how long ago the organism died. However, this method has a significant drawback: there is no way to be certain that the rate of decay truly remained constant throughout all those years. This means that once again we are relying on an unverified assumption, since it is entirely possible that significant changes occurred in the distant past that affected the rate of decay.
Indeed, many scientists question the reliability of radiometric dating-the most prominent among them being Paul Dirac, one of the leading physicists of the twentieth century. As Professor Moshe Trop writes at the end of his book The Riddle of Existence:
“There are many question marks regarding the reliability of radiometric tests. It turns out that in several types of rocks, the expected decay series does not produce the residual elements that should be found in the rocks… Lava rocks whose age is known from historical records have yielded (in tests) entirely unrealistic ages. Reports from all over the world describe young rocks, only a few hundred years old, behaving as though their ages were on the order of millions or even billions of years.”
.
The scientific method used to determine the age of the universe is called extrapolation-that is, drawing estimated conclusions about the past based on certain data available in the present (such as fossils and similar findings).
An example that illustrates the problem with partial observations is the growth rate of bamboo. This plant does not grow at all for several months, and then suddenly enters a remarkable growth spurt, reaching a rate of up to an entire meter in a single day. If we observe bamboo during its “dormant” periods, it may appear to have lost its ability to grow altogether. But if we observe it during its growth phase, we might conclude that it could reach a height of 30 meters in a single month.
In reality, both inferred conclusions are incorrect-because the growth rate of bamboo changes over time. The analogy is clear: extrapolation can easily mislead our understanding of reality.
The Torah describes the entire story of Creation in just thirty-four verses-a small space that contains a great deal. These verses are rich in wisdom and profound secrets, and therefore should not be understood in a purely literal way. Here is one example:
At the end of each day of Creation, God says, “And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” A day, as we know, is the completion of the Earth’s rotation on its axis, during which part of the time we face the sun (daytime) and part of the time we do not (night). Yet the Torah describes the first, second, and third days, while stating that the luminaries themselves-the sun and the moon-were created only on the fourth day. How, then, were days measured before there were luminaries in the sky?
In the Talmud, the study of the physical wisdom of Creation is called Ma’aseh Bereishit (“the Work of Creation”) and is considered part of the tradition of mystical teaching, which explains such ideas in concepts that are not familiar to us.
An additional explanation, which may help make this more accessible, is as follows: On the first day of Creation, God created the capacity for illumination independently of the heavenly bodies-the very possibility of light itself. Thus, there was already a distinction between light and darkness within a day, even though the sun and the moon had not yet been created. The Torah’s description of the first day reads:
“And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good, and God separated the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night” (Genesis 1:3-5).
Nachmanides (the Ramban) explains that regarding the creation of this light, the phrase “and it was so” (vayehi chen) does not appear, as it does with the other creations, because this light was not intended to illuminate throughout all the days of the world like the other created entities, which were established permanently. Only on the fourth day, when the luminaries-the sun and the moon-were created, was the function of illumination entrusted to them, enabling the distinction between day and night. Since these luminaries were fixed and enduring, unlike the temporary light of the first day, the Torah says of them, “and it was so.”
Another explanation that reconciles the gap between the scientific view and the Torah’s account is based on the fact that the Hebrew calendar does not count years from the creation of the universe, but from the creation of humankind, which took place on the sixth day, at the completion of Creation.
So what were the days of Creation like before the creation of humanity? Each “day” was in fact a period extending over a very long span of time. In other words, everything we know in Creation-galaxies, matter, animals, and plants-according to this view, came into being over six extended epochs, referred to in the Torah as “six days.” Only when the world reached an appropriate level of maturity, about 5,800 years ago, was humanity created-a rational being endowed with a spiritual soul.
Indeed, historians determine that the earliest civilizations known to us began more or less at this time, marking the sudden appearance of a new entity in Creation: the human being.
This idea puts to rest the claim that the question of the age of the universe poses a contradiction to Jewish faith. On the contrary, these two beliefs-the universe being billions of years old and faith in the Torah-can coexist side by side.
If the theories that attempt to explain the origin and age of the universe are so fragile, how did they arise in the first place? Professor Jeremiah Branover addresses this question:
“It is human nature to seek an explanation for everything around us. And any theory-even one that does not fit particularly well-is better than none, at least until a better explanation is found.
One might ask: in the absence of another coherent theory, why is the account of Creation not accepted by scientists as it is written in the Torah? The answer to this question is also: human nature. It is a natural human ambition to invent and to be original. Accepting what is written in the Bible deprives a person of the opportunity to demonstrate analytical and inductive ingenuity in this area. Therefore, the scientist who ignores what is stated in the Bible must invent reasons to ‘justify’ doing so, and finds them by classifying the biblical account alongside ancient and primitive mythology, since it cannot be argued against on a scientific basis.” (From Faith and Science, Prof. Jeremiah Branover)
Scientists claim that the universe is billions of years old and that it is impossible to say that Creation occurred only 6,000 years ago. Their proof is that there are stars located more than 6,000 light-years away from Earth, as well as archaeological findings that attest to the world’s existence for a very long time.
These arguments would indeed be justified if one were to claim that the world was created 6,000 years ago in an undeveloped, primordial state-mere beginnings of existence. But this is not what Judaism claims about the state of the world at the time of its creation. The Torah teaches that the world was created in a developed state, complete with animals and plant life, all whole, complete, and mature.
The disagreement between science and the Torah on this issue can be understood through a parable: An artist creates a statue in the likeness of an eighty-year-old man, using special materials until the statue appears exactly like a real person. When he finishes his work, he calls his friends and asks, “How old is this old man?” One answers that he is eighty years old; another answers that he is one day old. Who is correct?
In truth, there is no disagreement between them. The first described the statue’s apparent age-the number of years it would normally take a person to reach such an outward appearance-while the second described its actual age, since the artist had completed the work only that day.
The Talmud states (Rosh Hashanah 11a): ”Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: All the works of Creation were created in their full stature, with understanding, and in their complete form.” Adam and Eve were created as adults rather than as infants (Bereishit Rabbah), and likewise, God created all of Creation in a developed state, possessing a mature form and character. The world was created with an appearance of age, as though it had already existed for billions of years-exactly as scientists describe.
Thus, in truth, there is no real disagreement between science and the Torah regarding the age of the universe. Science describes the apparent age of the world, while Judaism defines its actual age.
Based on an article by Rabbi Avigdor Nebenzahl, from the book Jerusalem in Its Appointed Times – The Holy Sabbath.
