Andrew A. Snelling is a YEC and "has a Ph.D. in geology from the University of Sydney from 1982.
He was, for a decade, the geology spokesman for the Creation Science Foundation, the coordinating center for creationism in Australia. He started working for Answers in Genesis in 2007 and serves as AiG's director of research.
Snelling has been published in standard geological publications estimating the age of geological specimens in billions of years, but has also written articles for creationist journals in which he supports a young-earth creationism viewpoint."
(Wikipedia)
He "completed a Bachelor of Science degree in Applied Geology with First Class Honours at The University of New South Wales in Sydney, and graduated a Doctor of Philosophy (in geology) at The University of Sydney, for his thesis entitled A geochemical study of the Koongarra uranium deposit, Northern Territory, Australia. Between studies and since, Andrew worked for six years in the exploration and mining industries in Tasmania, New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia and the Northern Territory variously as a field, mine and research geologist. Full-time with the Australian creation ministry from 1983 to 1998, he was during this time also called upon as a geological consultant to the Koongarra uranium project (1983–1992)."
(creation.com)
I am familiar with Andrew A. Snelling and the fact that for more than 20 years he has made his living, not as a scientist, but as a peddler of young earth creationism. Like all other pseudoscientists advocating for young earth creationism, his life is anchored in a severe misunderstanding of the Bible—especially Genesis 1-11.
This misunderstanding stems largely from the use of the King James Version of the Bible and its use of the word firmament in Genesis 1:6-8:
Genesis 1:6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
The KJV correctly translates the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ (râqı̂ya‛) as “firmament”, but most modern readers of the KJV are unaware of the meaning of the word and do not realize that it expresses the concept of the strong, solid dome that supported the water above the dome. Indeed, the word firmament comes to us from the Latin word
firmamentum which comes from the infinitive of the Latin verb ‘
firmare’ meaning, “to strengthen,” and the suffix ‘-ment’. The suffix ‘-ment’ in nouns expresses the
result of the action of the infinitive of the cognate verb. Hence, the noun ‘firmament’ expresses the result of the action of the infinitive of the Latin verb ‘
firmare’ meaning “to strengthen,” that is, “something that is strong.” In Genesis 1:6-8, the word expresses the concept of the strong, solid dome that supported the water above the dome. Compare the verb “accomplish” and the noun “accomplishment,” and the verb “advertise” and the noun “advertisement.” For detailed documentation, please see the
Oxford English Dictionary.
When Wycliffe translated the Old Testament from the Latin Vulgate, he translated Genesis 1:6-7 as follows:
Genesis 1:6. And God seide, The firmament be maad in the myddis of watris, and departe watris fro watris.
7. And God made the firmament, and departide the watris that weren vndur the firmament fro these watris that weren on the firmament; and it was don so.
Wycliffe, of course, had no issue with the word “firmament” expressing the concept of a solid structure, but as the Church gradually accepted that the earth is not flat but nearly spherical, the Church gradually ignored the actual meaning of the word “firmament” and concocted a new one—“ the atmosphere.”
However, the Latin Vulgate was not the first translation of the Old Testament to interpret the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ as expressing a strong, solid structure. The translators of the Septuagint translated the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ using the Greek word, στερέωμα. This Greek word expresses the concept of “the sky as a supporting structure,
the firmament.” (BDAG, the italics are theirs). This Greek word is also found in Paul’s writings to express the concept of a “state or condition of firm commitment,
firmness, steadfastness” (BDAG, the italics are theirs),
Col. 2.5. εἰ γὰρ καὶ τῇ σαρκὶ ἄπειμι, ἀλλὰ τῷ πνεύματι σὺν ὑμῖν εἰμι, χαίρων καὶ βλέπων ὑμῶν τὴν τάξιν καὶ τὸ στερέωμα τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως ὑμῶν. (NA28)
Col. 2.5. For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, and I rejoice to see your morale and the firmness of your faith in Christ. (NRSV)
The Greek word στερέωμα is also found in a number of other ancient Greek writings where it always expresses the concepts of something solid, strength, firmness or steadfastness. Indeed, all hands (even the folks at Answers in Genesis!) freely admit that this Greek word expresses in Genesis the concept of a ‘solid, supporting structure.’ However, the folks at Answers in Genesis deny that it is an accurate translation of the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ. Indeed, they write,
Critics of the Bible have often said that the writings of Genesis reflect an “unscientific view” of the universe—one that reflected the cosmology of the ancient world….The argument from these Bible critics is that the ancient Hebrews believed in a solid dome with the stars embedded in the dome. They say that the word firmament reflects the idea of firmness, and this reflects erroneous cosmology. Therefore, the Bible is not the inspired Word of God, and we don’t need to listen to its teaching.
This is a willful and deliberate misrepresentation of the facts. The truth is that scholars of the Hebrew text of Genesis and the ancient translations of it into Greek and Latin agree that the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ expresses the concept of a solid structure, and that in the Old Testament it conveys the idea of a solid dome. Scholars of the history of the translation of the English Bible agree that the word firmament comes from the Latin word firmamentum in the Latin vulgate, which expresses the concept of the sky as a strong supporting structure. There are, of course, implications from these linguistic facts, but those implications are left for the exegetes and theologians to work out. Believing these linguistic facts and believing that the Bible is not the inspired Word of God and that we do not need to pay attention to its teachings are two
entirely different concepts that Answers in Genesis dishonestly lumps together to deceive its readers.
And their deliberate and willful deception has only begun. Indeed they write,
The Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures produced by Jewish scholars in the third century BC at the request of the Egyptian pharaoh) translates raqia into the Greek word stereoma, which connotes a solid structure. Apparently, the translators of the Septuagint were influenced by the Egyptian view of cosmology, which embraced the notion of the heavens being a stone vault (after all, they were doing their translation work in Egypt!). Later, this Greek connotation influenced Jerome to the extent that, when he produced his Latin Vulgate around AD 400, he used the Latin word firmamentum (meaning a strong or steadfast support). The King James translators merely transliterated this Latin word—and thus was born the firmament.
This fictitious gibberish is loosely based upon a letter supposedly written by Aristeas to Philocrates concerning the very early history of the Septuagint. There is absolutely nothing in the letter implying or even suggesting that the translation choices in the Septuagint were influenced by any Egyptians. Moreover, there is absolutely nothing in the letter regarding the Egyptian view of cosmology. Furthermore, there is absolutely no evidence of any kind whatsoever that the Egyptian view of cosmology influenced Jerome in his translation of the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ. Indeed, Old Latin translations of the Bible were based largely upon the Septuagint, but Jerome knew Hebrew and he revised the Old Latin translations to bring them into conformity with the Hebrew Text. Of course, the folks at Answers in Genesis do not provide any evidence to support their ludicrous and imaginative notion that some Egyptians influenced the wording of the Septuagint. Indeed, there is absolutely no evidence of any kind that some Egyptians influenced the wording of the Septuagint; but there is a massive amount of evidence that such a thing did not occur. I believe that the folks at Answers in Genesis know this, but that the very last things that they care about are the truth and the eternal harm that their lies are doing to unwary readers of their fictitious propaganda. In fact, the Scriptures themselves call the Apostle Paul as a witness to the fact that the Septuagint is an accurate translation of the Hebrew text. Indeed, Paul routinely quoted from the Septuagint as Scripture! (For extensive documentation and discussion of the issue, please see Beale, G.K. and Carson, D.A. eds.
Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007. For more recent studies, please see Longnecker, Richard N.
The Epistle to the Romans: A Commentary on the Greek Text [in the New International Greek Testament Commentary series]. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans publishing Co., 2016, and Harvey, John D.
A Commentary on Romans [in the Kregel Exegetical Library series]. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2019).