Re: Kerkut (was: Re: A case for Christianity that does use ID orYEC arguments)

Alan Hayward seems to have done a grand job, saving both Gary and Glenn from
perdition.

To me it was a so-so book, sound but unexciting, but it bore fruit

Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Collins" <gwcollins@algol.co.uk>
To: "Michael Roberts" <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>;
<pruest@mail-ms.sunrise.ch>; <pruest@mysunrise.ch>; "Ted Davis"
<TDavis@messiah.edu>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: Kerkut (was: Re: A case for Christianity that does use ID orYEC
arguments)

> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:21:45 -0000, Michael Roberts wrote:
>
> >Kerkut also kept me from being TE in the 70s but I never ever flirted
with
> >YEC as I have always been so totally convinced by all geological argument
> >for a vast age and contra Wally consider them as proven as any other
> >science. However the consequences of denying the age of the earth are not
as
> >serious as discounting the acceleration due to gravity as it gets rather
> >painful if you decide g is 9.81 cm/sec2 rather than 981.
> >
> >Michael
>
> Thanks Michael, Paul and Ted for your feedback on this book. I used to be
a
> yec (with a small 'y') many years ago, since I had learned that people
with
> impressive qualifications could hold this view, apparently with sincerity
> (I had no reason to believe otherwise). It was only when I started looking
> more closely into the issue that I came to learn of the unreliability of
(at least
> most of) the YEC writers, and read of some things which seemed impossible
> to fit into the YEC paradigm, that I changed my mind on this. (Alan
Hayward's
> books were the ones that first opened my eyes). I, too, see no reason not
to accept
> the age of the earth, more or less as given, since radioactive dating has
been
> confirmed to be accurate in archaeological cases, and it seems to me that
there
> is no reason why it shouldn't also be accurate over the longer timescales.
> It may be out by a few percent, but not enough to make a case for a young
> (< 10^4 y) earth. I have found Blocher's work to be some of the most
useful
> for the theological aspect of the creation issue.
>
> I came across a reference to Kerkut many years ago (memory fails somewhat,
> but I don't think it was a YEC source) and I'm pretty sure I once borrowed
the
> book from my local library. It doesn't seem to be in stock there anymore,
> though. I too have heard nothing of him for many years, but something
jogged
> my memory the other day and I wondered what others thought of his work.
> I think I will try to get hold of a copy for myself, maybe amazon or
somewhere
> will have one. I actually met Kerkut briefly, he was a professor at
Southampton
> University, where I once embarked on an ill-fated course in medicine. But
I
> wasn't aware of his book at that time, or else I didn't make the
connection,
> otherwise I would have asked him directly about his beliefs and his work.
> I'm sure I read somewhere that he is/was an atheist. I don't know if he is
still
> alive now, my memory of him is of a man getting on in years a bit, and
that
> was <ahem!> years ago.
>
> Thanks again,
> /Gary
>
>
>
>
Received on Wed Feb 4 15:47:58 2004