Norman Geisler response to AIG / YEC / Ken Ham

[Philip]

Many of you here know that Dr. Norman Geisler is widely viewed by by prominent evangelicals and theologians as one of the world's most important theologians. He wrote the following article and responses to Answers in Genesis / Ken Ham over whether belief in inerrancy of the Bible requires a Young-Universe / Young-Earth Answer.

Geisler first wrote this, article ("Does Believing in Inerrancy Require One to Believe in Young-Earth Creationism?":
https://normangeisler.com/does-believin ... eationism/

Then, Ken Ham of AIG (Answers in Genesis) wrote a response to Geisler's article (linked above), "The Ultimate Motivation of This Prominent Theologian":
https://answersingenesis.org/creationis ... eologian/

And lastly, Geisler followed up by responding to AIG's response to his original article, here:
https://normangeisler.com/a-response-to ... ung-earth/

It's a fascinating exchange that highlights many of the key issues surrounding the often-contentious debate over the length of time of God's creation days. And I think Geisler offers some exceptionally wise counsel over the dangers of making either OEC or YEC views a litmus test for orthodox belief, or of belief in the inerrancy of Scripture, or of the authenticity of one's faith in Christ. But draw your own conclusions!

[Philip]

BTW, I posted the above, as a church community group I'm leading has now wandered into this potentially flammable issue (of the time length of the Creation days), as we have begun discussing various aspects of the Creation. But I'm intentionally not going to allow us to get into that argument, precisely per some of what is referenced in the exchanges per the links above.