Redemptive History

GRMorton@aol.com
Tue, 22 Aug 1995 23:34:16 -0400

Gordie writes:
>>Glenn's 5-million-year-old-flood story has prompted several postings
concerning the time span of redemptive history. Bill Hamilton
expressed the issue well as follows: [If so, then] "God has been
active in the lives of men for far longer than we had previously believed."
<<

As a recent convert to an old earth form of creationism, I am a little
surprised at the surprise that Bill, and others have expressed at the
concept that God would have been involved in human affairs for
several million years.

Consider the following syllogism:

Assumptions:

1. The earth is billions of years old.

Justification: Direct geometrical triangulation of distance
has been measured for an expanding shell of gas from a
supernova in the galaxy M81. The triangulated
distance is 4 megaparsecs or 13 million light years.
The universe is large and light would take 13 million
years to get here from that object.(See Bartel et al, Nature
,368, April 14, 1994, p. 610 Other objects appear much
much further based on the laws of light intensity.

2. Radioactive dating methods work.

Justification: To deny this requires a change in the fundamental
constants of nature which keep us alive at the values
they presently have or a massive conspiracy on the part
of God to tamper with petrochemistry .

3. Homo erectus (brain-size c. 950 cc.) is human.

Justification: he made fire and stone tools. Anatole France, the
French novelist had a cranial capacity of only 1100
cc.(Custance, 1967, "Establishing a Paleolithic I.Q.",
Doorway Paper, 22, p. 33)

As I was writing this, I was listening to the
"Human Animal" on the Learning Channel. Desmond
Morris stated that the oldest man-made art object in
the world is the 300,000 year old Golan Venus which
is 250,000 years older than the next oldest art object.
(a Venus is a scupture of a naked lady)
According to the Cambridge Encyclopaedia of
Archaeology, (1980) this takes you back to the era of
Homo Erectus or an intermediate between erectus and
neanderthal. I would appreciate any comments by
anyone on this object and the people who made it (e.g.
was it an early neanderthal rather than erectus), but
if Homo Erectus had artistic sensibilities, his inclusion
as a human would seem quite natural.

In any event, there is a ritualistically laid out elephant
carcass from the time of Homo erectus at Torralba, Spain
400,000 years ago.(see Johanson and Shreeve,
Lucy's Child, (Morrow, 1989), p. 221) This could imply
some type of spiritual awareness.

4. The plan of salvation applies to all men.
Justification: none needed.

Conclusion, since Homo erectus lived up to 2 million years
ago, God must have been concerned for man for the past 2 million years..

If the Golan venus was made by a neanderthal (and homo erectus is not human),
then most certainly God must have been concerned with his spiritual state
300,000 years ago, since even many of the staff at ICR allow Neanderthal to
be part of the human family. So, in any event, the conclusion falls out that
God was interested in mankind for a very long time! Since the Golan venus
was found on the Golan heights region, it is unlikely that he could represent
a "prediluvial" man due to the topography. So, once again, the conclusion
comes that IF there was a flood, it was a long, long time ago. If the man
that made the Golan venus was post diluvial, then the standard Chronology of
man which Christians teach (I.e. spiritual mankind arose within the past
24,000 years [Hugh Ross Finger Print of God, p. 160] is wildly in error.
There is every possibility that these Venus figures were religious objects as
well as an ancient form of pornography. Think of the "venus figures" that
graced the Roman temples just 2,000 years ago.

The YEC's escape this syllogism by denying 1 and 2. and often 3.

But progressive creationists, can only escape it by denying 3
(which seems difficult in light of the technological activity (and
possible artistic ability) of *homo erectus*) and it is difficult to see how
an evolutionary creationist can escape it at all.
If the data justifying this syllogism is correct, then a massive
alteration in the way we look at the early chapters of Genesis
is way over due.

glenn
16075 Longvista Dr.
Dallas, Texas 75248