Genesis 5 prove young earth?

[otjm]

That is not particularly responding to bufffalo’s questionl The use of scripture scholarship to identify the various forms of literature did not and do not limit the issue as citing “error” if something is clearly not a historical report. The Church does not follow the literalist reading of the genealogy between Adam and Noah. Neither does it say that the genealogy is “wrong”.

 

[BartholomewB]

The Church does not follow the literalist reading of the genealogy between Adam and Noah. Neither does it say that the genealogy is “wrong”.

This approach to the early chapters of Genesis – taking them as the basis of supposedly precise calculations of the dates of historical events – has surely always been a Protestant thing, not a Catholic thing. Archbishop Ussher, who famously used the genealogies in the early chapters of Genesis to work out the exact date of the Creation, was an Anglican, not a Catholic.

Ussher chronology - Wikipedia

 

[buffalo]

But that document was the start of acceptance of looking at the various literature formats of the Old Testament.

No problem looking at the various literature formats…

I do not see how a complete reversal takes place suddenly against the constant teaching and understanding for thousands of years.

Was the Holy Spirit asleep all this time and only recently awoke?