Why Disbelieve a Young Earth?
The issue of science and the Bible is increasingly becoming vital in our desire to help the secularized to Christ. It is for that reason I post the following.
Dr. Jud Davis:
I would ask my evangelical brothers some basic questions. If the text of Genesis 1-2 does not mean to teach traditional chronology and twenty-four-hour days,
1. Why does Jesus take Genesis 1-2 as teaching history (Mt. 19:4, Mark 10:6)?
2. Why does Paul take it as history (Rom. 5:12; 1 Cor. 11:8-9; 15:21-22; 15:45; 1 Tim. 2:12-14)?
3. Why do nearly all world-class Hebraists assume that the writer of Genesis intended normal days and the text as history?
4. Why did the ancient, medieval, and modern church- until about 1800- have few commentators (if any) who believed in an ancient universe?
5. Why do all of the ancient translations and paraphrases, such as the Aramaic Targums, take the words at face value and translate them as "days," with no hint that they might mean "ages" in Genesis 1?
6. Why is there little or no classical Rabbinic support for an ancient universe?
7. Why are there well-qualified PhD scientists who still support physical data as consistent with young-earth view?
Nobody has provided me with answers that point to anything but a traditional view of the original meaning. Anyone who says that a closer study of Hebrew leads elsewhere is simply incorrect.
-Quoted from Answers Magazine, April-June, 2012.