Originally posted by Robin
Horton is doing what we should do: not speak beyond Scripture. As to the literal day conclusion, a 6,000 year-old earth cannot be derived from it. The dots are not connected. Calculating the age of the earth is speculating.
What I've learned, so far...when in apologetical discussions, we should refrain from concluding the earth's age and steer towards the historical FACTS of God's creation power to the existence of Adam and Eve.
From here, I argue the fact of Adam and Eve from Christ
-- since Jesus attested their reality. That way, the opponent is confronted with Christ's authority. (Btw, I have never seen the opposition prevail, here. It seems not many are ready to deal with Jesus' words. Must be something powerful in the name?)
Admitting the mistakes and knuckleheadedness of our forebears is also good to do. Move back to Christ
's teaching a historical Adam; Noah; Jonah. The point is: not
to defend incredible claims of a God that spoke the universe into existence; talking snakes; a global flood; a man living inside a fish - but to defend
: Jesus Christ, who lived, died and was raised on the third day. Let the Gospel defend God's existence and power.
This is what Scripture does...and I think we're wise to do the same.