That's a difficult question. There are many things about the story that we do not understand. Many religions offer origin stories which suggest that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Without discounting that as a possibility, one is left with three possible conclusions:
1. The science about the age of the universe is just wrong. If we performed the proper experiments, we might conclude that the universe really began October 28, 4004 BC at 6:00 am.
2. These origin stories are wrong. Or such stories were told to help people understand something about the nature of the world. That is to say, the stories were not recorded as specific scientific records.
3. The universe was simply created to look older than it really is.
There is no scientific argument against option 3. If that is true, we have no way of testing the age of the universe.
Between 1 and 2, one of the most compelling pieces of information is the vast size of the universe. In just the last hundred years we've learned that the stars in the sky are all part of an immense group of stars we call a galaxy. It's so big that it takes light 100,000 years to travel from one side to the other. And then we discovered other galaxies. They were first described as "mini universes" because they seemed so much like that universe (now called a galaxy) that we lived in. More and better telescopes have shown us numerous galaxies in portions of the sky that are so far away they appear no bigger than a grain of rice held at arm's length. These galaxies are so far away that it would take billions of years for their light to reach earth.
The universe we observe is really really big and really really old. Most scientists agree that about 14 billion years is the correct age for the universe. Others calculate that the earth has been around for about 4.5 billion years. That's enough time for the magma to cool, for water to condense and form oceans. And, most incredibly, for life to begin and change and grow to the marvelous world we see today.
Whether you choose to believe any of the three options suggested above, you must consider this one piece of data: the universe is very big. Scientists conclude that if it is that big, it must be old. And if it is old, any explanation of the epochs of time must consider the slow processes that might have left the universe as we see it today.
The question is a contradiction in terms Because before life ( was created) There could be no life.
Before life began there was only non life. Non life was abiotic that means that there was only matter and energy. How life could have come about from non life is a mystery.
Life is DNA , DNA is fundamentally information. How information necessary for life came into being is a huge question. It has been calculated that there is not enough time in the estimated age of the universe using all the estimated atoms in the universe to create by totally random changes to create even one functional enzyme.
Natural laws of entropy (The second law of thermodynamics) indicate that systems move from order to disorder. To move from no information to complex information is to go against natural laws.
Before life there was only natural laws and abiotic matter and energy. There was no life.