“Do you even know what the Bible account of creation is, I mean literally is? There is not one word or hint or suggestion the heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 are young. AND Genesis 1:2 describe a complete destruction of this earth even to saying it was flooded. Moses does not address the specifics of this, although he does point to the source by using the phrase ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil.’
Literal evidence does not conflict with the literal words of the Bible...”
The premise of the opening post is that the Universe is young and conforms to the account of Genesis. So the opening poster thinks that Genesis does.
Yes I have read the bible account many times. It does say that God created the heavens and the earth is 6 days. It is very specific that there was morning and there was evening each day. If the bible did not say that the heavens and the earth are young then there would be no reason to try and reconcile the bible account with the now known fact that the earth is in the neighborhood of 4.5 billion years old by claiming that the days mentioned in genesis 1:1 are not literal days. What reason is there to conclude this? It does not say anything of the kind. Either Genesis can be taken literally or it must be interpreted. That would mean different people deciding it means different things which is exactly the situation you see today. So your assertion is false.
But that is not what the Bible literally says or even hints.
Yes I have read the bible account many times. It does say that God created the heavens and the earth is 6 days. It is very specific that there was morning and there was evening each day. If the bible did not say that the heavens and the earth are young then there would be no reason to try and reconcile the bible account with the now known fact that the earth is in the neighborhood of 4.5 billion years old by claiming that the days mentioned in genesis 1:1 are not literal days. What reason is there to conclude this? It does not say anything of the kind. Either Genesis can be taken literally or it must be interpreted. That would mean different people deciding it means different things which is exactly the situation you see today. So your assertion is false
Moses does not tell us how long those days of creation were, but Peter sure does. IIPeter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing,
that one day is with the LORD as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Not a very difficult concept to discern that those days of creation amounted to thousands of years instead of what we now call literal 24/7 days.
It is flesh man that makes the claim of a young earth and it sure does not come from the WORD. The literal evidence demonstrates without question this earth is very very old... Genesis 1:2 describes that earth age that then was, was destroyed nothing survived. Again, IIPeter 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of,
that by the word of God the heavens were of OLD, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
7 But the heavens and the earth which are NOW, by the same world are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
God gave the interpretation, planted throughout His Word by His elected holy prophets. Look how long Methuselah lived 969 years, not quite a 'day' with the Lord...
Genesis 6:3 And the LORD said, "My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his *days* shall be an hundred and twenty years...
Notice it says man's days, not God's days.