Re: Pejudice? Cowardice? Re: A Peace Proposal

Apologies for posting too often.
I'll take a break, Terry

Glenn Morton wrote:

> Hi Walter,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wallyshoes [mailto:wallyshoes@mindspring.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 7:41 PM
> >
> > I agree with you that they cannot both be true. However, I cannot
> > see any bullet
> > proof way to determine which is true and which is false. To take
> > a position that
> > one knows which is correct is what leads to the conflict (from
> > both sides).
>
> Then you don't accept any of modern scientific data regarding radiometric
> dating, the speed of light, the distance to the stars? Come on, Are you
> really saying that the scientific method can't demonstrate certain truths?
>
> >
> > None of the data you present refutes a YEC belief in a world in which the
> > history simply exists. It is equally valid for them to proclaim
> > that *you* are
> > the person who does not accept scripture and who's view is
> > fundamentally flawed.
>
> But Walter, that is precisely what the YECs do not do. they don't say the
> world was created with an appearance of age miraculously. Over and over
> they say that the scientific data supports their position. If they did say
> all history is appearance, then I would have no problem with them. I can't
> prove that the world wasn't created 15 seconds ago. But if all history is
> mere appearance, what of the resurrection? Using the logic you seem to
> suggest, they can't prove that the earth was created 6000 years ago rather
> than yesterday afternoon at 2:13 pm. That view is self-defeating.

I hate to dispute your expert knowledge on the subject but my data says that
what you say here is simply untrue.

Even Henry Morris (not my favorite person) says:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Simply stated, the idea of "creation with appearance of age" means that when
God created, those things which He created might superficially have looked as if
they had a history. When Adam was created, he no doubt looked like a mature
adult, fully able to walk, talk, care for the garden, etc. When God created
fruit trees, they were already bearing fruit. In each case, what He created was
functionally complete right from the start—able to fulfill the purpose for which
it was created. Stars, created on Day Four, had to be seen to perform their
purpose of usefulness in telling time; therefore, their light had to be visible
on Earth right from the start. God's evaluation that the completed creation was
"very good" (Genesis 1:31) necessitated that it be functionally complete,
operating in harmony, with each part fulfilling the purpose for which it was
created.

If a scientific observer today, with no knowledge of Adam's creation, traveled
back in time to Day Seven and tried to determine Adam's age (or the age of a
rock, or the age of a star), how could it be done? The scientist would rely on
today's human growth rates (or rates of radioactive decay, or the speed of
light), and calculate how long it would take for this state of maturity to
develop, and would come to a wrong conclusion.

This is because the world today is not as it was in creation. God's creative
powers are at rest now, and He is maintaining the creation using present laws of
physics."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can it get any clearer than that, Glenn? Despite the fact that it is Morris who
said this, it is what YECs that I know seem to believe. None of them practice
the voo-doo science that you attribute to them.

Walt

--
===================================
Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
In any consistent theory, there must
exist true but not provable statements.
(Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic
If you have already found the truth
without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
===================================