Replies

I don't understand how redshift is evidence of the age of the earth, perhaps you could enlighten me?

Concerning the Hebrew word for 'day', here is an excerpt from Refuting Compromise:

There is much supporting evidence from the way Genesis 1 is interpreted in other parts of the Bible, and from the way the Hebrew word yom("Day") is used throughout the Old Testament in different contexts. In particular, whenever yom is used with a number or the words evening or morning, it can mean only an ordinary day, never a long period of time. And the Fourth Commandment makes sense only if the days of creation week were the same as those of the ordinary working week.(end excerpt)

Dr Sarfati continues with an in-depth analysis of the original Hebrew and very clearly shows that the word 'yom', as used in Genesis 1, can only mean a 24 hour period of time.(Think mini Hebrew lesson)

And I highly doubt that Exodus 20:11 says:
"For in six era's or epoch's the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh era or epoch: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath era or epoch, and hallowed it."

Not to mention Exodus 20:9-10:
"Six era's or epoch's(your preference) shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
But the seventh era or epoch is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:"

It is my belief that it is better for "rational" people to reject True Christianity than to accept False Christianity and thus be deceived.

So the question is, should a Christian's beliefs conform to the Bible, or should the Bible conform to the "Christian's" beliefs.
I think the real reason that so many "scientists and other 'rational' people" reject the demand for a literal translation is because it does not agree with their deeply held beliefs.

“I don’t understand how redshift is evidence of the age of the earth, perhaps you could enlighten me?”

The redshift of light from distant galaxies is evidence that the universe is expanding. It is also evidence of the big bang origin of the universe. Cosmologists currently estimate the age of the universe at something like 14 billion years. Exactly how they came up with that estimate is beyond me, but Hugh Ross is an expert on it.

You have a strong attachment to the notion of literal 24-hour creation days. I’m not an expert on biblical translation, nor do I want to be, but I was impressed with Hugh Ross’s explanation when I heard it several years ago.

Incidentally, I read a book several years ago called “Genesis and the Big Bang” by Gerald Schroeder, who has a PhD in theoretical physics from MIT (IIRC). He claimed that if you account for relativistic time dilation in the early universe (when gravity was much stronger), what would seem like billions of years to us could actually be 24 hours in “God’s frame of reference”. If that is true, then we have reconciliation of “young earth” and scientific views. However, I am not qualified to say whether Schroeder got it right or not — PhD from MIT notwithstanding.

Assuming for now that Schroeder got it wrong, we are left with a choice. Either the Bible creation days are “long” days, or the Bible is scientific nonsense. You are welcome to take the latter view, but I’ll go with the former.