Skip to main content

The Best Evidence for the Young Earth?

Biblical creationists are occasionally requested to give what we consider the best evidence for creation, and closely following, the best evidence that the earth is young. We have quite a bit of scientific and logical evidence for both. However, it is a serious mistake to try to "out evidence" a skeptic, because they often counter with something else (often unrelated — be careful of distractions), then you counter the counter, ad nauseum, even though the evidence is on the side of biblical creationists.

Although evidence for the young earth is on the side of biblical creationists, we need to be very careful how we present it.
Credit: Unsplash / Robert Lukeman
Many times, atheists and evolutionists will reject what we present out of hand because of their naturalistic and deep time presuppositions. They are not in the habit of honestly considering books, videos, articles, and so on, and find rescuing devices. Creationists often have links thrown at us, which can be from atheistic and evolutionary sites, compromising Christians, and so forth. Scoffers have a habit of finding something written for us reg'lar folk and saying, "That doesn't prove the earth is young!" and conveniently forgetting that we have thousands of items to offer, which is another rescuing device.

Christians have presuppositions as well. We should be presupposing the truth of the Word of God. The scientific evidence does support recent creation. The problem is, people have been indoctrinated in the deep time view. As Christians, the Word of God is our ultimate starting point, and it causes serious problems if we put atheistic interpretations of scientific evidence in the magisterial position.

"But Cowboy Bob, the world looks old!"

People do say that, don't they? It looks old...based on what? There is no way to compare old and young worlds, and such opinions are tainted by deep time conditioning.

Don't be disunderstanding me now! Presenting scientific evidence for our position is important, but we must do it right. That is, we cannot "leave the Bible out of it" and discuss on "neutral ground". There is no such thing, and we are agreeing with their naturalistic presuppositions. Worse, we are denying what Scripture says about the mind of the unsaved person. Instead, believe the Bible, and present evidence from a Christian presuppositional framework, which means not divorcing evidence from Scripture. This is one of the most serious problems with the Intelligent Design movement.
In our evangelism we need to present design arguments along with the Scriptures. Don’t let Satan lead you into thinking that in your witness to skeptics who reject the Bible as God’s Word you cannot use the Scriptures at the same time as you use apologetics. Use Scripture and apologetics and never forget that whether people believe it or not, the Bible is the inspired and inerrant Word of God and is sharper than a two-edged sword (Hebrews 4:12). Faith comes from hearing the Word of Christ (Romans 10:17).
I agree with you that “to bring intellectuals to Christ takes good apologetics, love, prayer, and patience (or of course, an encounter with God!).” . . . We need to overcome our fear of using the Bible when we talk to skeptics. We must resist their insistence that we leave the Bible out of the discussion. It doesn’t matter if they don’t believe the Bible. God promises to honor his Word as we humbly and respectfully share it with others. We also need to expose and refute their faulty philosophical presuppositions (which most intellectual skeptics don’t even realize they have).
I'd be much obliged if you'd read the entire article, which also includes a passel of links to useful material. To read it, click on "What Is the Most Compelling Scientific Evidence of a Young Earth?"