The universe appears "old", but it is still less than 10,000 years old

[Cato]

Albert Mohler is the president of the Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville Kentucky. He is a Young Earth Creationist, however he does not deny that the universe appears to be old. However since he believes the universe is less than say 10,000 years old. So Mohler argues that either god created the universe to appear "old" or that the "fall" rapidly aged the universe.

A Christian Fundamentalist friend of mine, who admitted that he leans to a "six day" creation position thought Mohler's argument was appealing.

Essentially this speech he gave to a ministry conference outlines his argument.

Transcript in this link below.

http://biologos.org/resources/albert-moh...ook-so-old

The transcript is a more thorough explanation than the argument given in the video.

Mohler is at least honest when indicating that scientific understanding of the universe contradicts the bible as the inspired and inerrant word of God. For this reason he rejects scientific claims, but at no point does he attack its methodology. He later describes scientific knowledge as changing throughout history and uses this as a reason to reject scientific claims for the unchanging biblical account. Mohler also suggests that science cannot be trusted since it will produce new facts (air quotes given in the video) in the future.

Mohler clearly communicates his understanding of what's at stake in the transcript. He understands that if evolution and our current understanding of cosmology are accepted then the entire basis for the Christian religion falls apart. He contends that natural disasters are a consequence of the fall and could not have happened prior to the original sin. He knows that if there was no historical Adam that there is no need for redemption. This is given as another reason to reject scientific claims.

I'll quote Mohler from the first paragraph of the transcript: "And our absolute confidence is that there is no question Christians need fear." At first I thought this was the same fear associated with the idea of hell as incentive to believe, but later understood this to be that Christians should fear that the entire edifice of the religion comes crashing down once scientific facts are accepted.

Part of the reason I conclude this is that Mohler seems more concerned with the theological consequences of fellow Christians that attempt to reconcile reality with scripture. Mohler suggests that any non-literal understanding of scripture means that it is nothing more than the creation myth of ancient Hebrews.