For example, around the year 1600 AD, in response to the scientist Galileo’s support for the heliocentric view of the universe, Cardinal Bellarmine wrote: “I say that, as you know, the Council (of Trent) prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers.And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes, and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining literally that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the center of the universe.Some claim Genesis in particular, and the Bible in general looks mythical from this standpoint.A full discussion of the topic must therefore include the current scientific challenge to the OE concept.In their letter, however, aside from sending an attachment detailing these new methods, they cited two caveats.One was that the new methods of dating materials should be applied to determine relative not absolute chronology, that is, earlier versus later in the same test run -- absolute chronology in their view being virtually impossible to determine because of the multiple imprecisions to which C14 testing was subject.MANY scientists and theologians have made the argument that Christianity is not at odds with the scientific world view. It is true that many portions of the Bible (for example, the Ten Commandments) do not make empirical claims and hence have no conflict with science, a field which concerns itself solely with those questions that are (at least in principle) of a testable nature.What’s more, in those sections of the Bible that do make empirical claims about the way things were or will be, if one is willing to apply a sufficiently metaphorical interpretation to the text then whenever science and Christianity appear to contradict each other we can simply loosen or relax the religious interpretation until the disagreement disappears.
The new AMS C14 techniques did not consume so much material and therefore, could be used test the claims of paleographic analysis that were at the time being cited regarding the chronology of the Scrolls by members of the International Team as gospel.
This makes radiocarbon dating quite useful, up to a point.
Error factors, plus or minus, involve hundreds of years.
This challenge is mainly headed by Creationism which teaches a young-earth (YE) theory.
A young earth is considered to be typically just 6,000 years old since this fits the creation account and some dating deductions from Genesis.