I don't think I would argue that. There is a ton of evidence against a
resurrection.
>The resurrection was a unique miraculous event.
I don't think I would argue that.
Ah, but you might say the
>creation was as well. The problem is that if it were, then God seems to
>have planted a lot of evidence to cover His tracks and make it look old.
>Why, if it were created recently, would God go through all the trouble to
>make it look so old by fiddling with dozens of isotopic ratios (not just
>here on earth, but also in meteorites and on the moon),
How would you have done it so there were no traces of appearance of age?
Lets start with an earth that was cool. How deceptive it would be of God to
put man on an earth that was not molten....
stack strata
>upon strata, place millions upon millions of fossil organisms in such strata
>(start putting therapsids here, stop putting trilobites there, etc.), leave
>evidence for Precambrian, Permian, Pleistocene ice ages, etc. etc. etc...?
>
> In theory, as a Christian I have no problem with God intervening in
>miraculous ways. I am however, uncomfortable with God doing so and then
>making it look very convincingly as if He didn't. No offense, but it's
>been my experience that most people I meet who believe in a young earth
>have never studied geology or gone out to look at rocks. What I, as a
>Christian geologist, would love to do is find a geologist who believes in
>a young earth. The only one I know of is Steve Austin at the ICR and I've
>never had the pleasure of speaking with him (I'd love to take him up on
>some of his comments in "Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophy")!
>
>- Steve.
>
>--
> Steven H. Schimmrich Callsign KB9LCG s-schim@uiuc.edu
> Department of Geology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
> 245 Natural History Building, Urbana, IL 61801 (217) 244-1246
> http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/s-schim Deus noster refugium
>
Art
http://chadwicka.swac.edu