Changes

== Criticism ==

== Criticism ==

[[Young Earth creationism|Young-Earth creationists]] point out that belief in an old Earth is frequently based on extra-biblical sources, not on the Bible.  For example:

Meanwhile [[Young Earth creationism|Young-Earth creationists]] hold that belief in an old Earth is frequently based on extra-biblical sources, not on the Bible.  For example:

{{QuoteBox|If an old earth were really the teaching of Scripture, then one claim is glaringly conspicuous by its absence, that is, any claim in commentaries that the Bible ''unambiguously teaches'' long ages.  Rather, the usual claim is that the biblical text appears on the surface to teach a young earth but ''may allow for'' an old earth.&mdash;[[Jonathan Sarfati]]<ref>Sarfati, Jonathan, ''Refuting Compromise'', Master Books, March 2004, p.55.  Emphasis in original.</ref>}}

{{QuoteBox|If an old earth were really the teaching of Scripture, then one claim is glaringly conspicuous by its absence, that is, any claim in commentaries that the Bible ''unambiguously teaches'' long ages.  Rather, the usual claim is that the biblical text appears on the surface to teach a young earth but ''may allow for'' an old earth.&mdash;[[Jonathan Sarfati]]<ref>Sarfati, Jonathan, ''Refuting Compromise'', Master Books, March 2004, p.55.  Emphasis in original.</ref>}}

{{QuoteBox|It is apparent that the most straightforward understanding of Genesis, without regard to the hermeneutical considerations suggested by science, is that God created the heavens and the earth in six solar days, that man was created on the sixth day, and that death and chaos entered the world after the fall of Adam and Eve, and that all fossils were the result of the catastrophic deluge that spared only Noah’s family and the animals therewith.&mdash;[[Pattle Pun]]<ref>Pun, P.P.T., ''Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation'' 39:14, 1987; quoted by Creation Ministries International[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4155].</ref>}}

{{QuoteBox|It is apparent that the most straightforward understanding of Genesis, without regard to the hermeneutical considerations suggested by science, is that God created the heavens and the earth in six solar days, that man was created on the sixth day, and that death and chaos entered the world after the fall of Adam and Eve, and that all fossils were the result of the catastrophic deluge that spared only Noah’s family and the animals therewith.&mdash;[[Pattle Pun]]<ref>Pun, P.P.T., ''Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation'' 39:14, 1987; quoted by Creation Ministries International[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4155].</ref>}}

{{QuoteBox|[C]onfessedly, it would not have been as readily deduced from the Genesis text had it not been for the evidences advanced by secular science.&mdash;J. Barton Payne<ref>J. B. Payne, ''The Theology of the Older Testament'', (Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan, 1972, p.136); quoted in Sarfati, Jonathan, "Refuting Compromise", Master Books, March 2004</ref>}}

{{QuoteBox|[C]onfessedly, it would not have been as readily deduced from the Genesis text had it not been for the evidences advanced by secular science.&mdash;J. Barton Payne<ref>J. B. Payne, ''The Theology of the Older Testament'', (Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan, 1972, p.136); quoted in Sarfati, Jonathan, "Refuting Compromise", Master Books, March 2004</ref>}}

{{QuoteBox|We have to admit here [concerning those who take the six days of Creation as literal days] that the exegetical basis [the arguments from the words of Scripture] of the creationists is strong. … In spite of the careful biblical and scientific research that has accumulated in support of the creationists’ view, there are problems that make the theory wrong to most (including many evangelical) scientists. … Data from various disciplines point to a very old earth and even older universe.’&mdash;James Montgomery Boice<ref>Montgomery Boice, J.L., ''Genesis: An Expositional Commentary'', Zondervan Publishing House, Michigan, 1:57–62, 1982; quoted by [[Ken Ham|Ham, Ken]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/324/#r5 The big picture], ''Creation'' 23(2):16–18, March 2001 (their insertions in square parentheses).</ref>}}

{{QuoteBox|We have to admit here [concerning those who take the six days of Creation as literal days] that the exegetical basis [the arguments from the words of Scripture] of the creationists is strong. … In spite of the careful biblical and scientific research that has accumulated in support of the creationists’ view, there are problems that make the theory wrong to most (including many evangelical) scientists. … Data from various disciplines point to a very old earth and even older universe.’&mdash;James Montgomery Boice<ref>Montgomery Boice, J.L., ''Genesis: An Expositional Commentary'', Zondervan Publishing House, Michigan, 1:57–62, 1982; quoted by [[Ken Ham|Ham, Ken]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/324/#r5 The big picture], ''Creation'' 23(2):16–18, March 2001 (their insertions in square parentheses).</ref>}}

==External links==

==External links==