From: allenroy (allenroy@peoplepc.com)
Date: Sat Oct 04 2003 - 02:09:38 EDT
Michael Roberts wrote:
> You asked me once before. It would take too long to itemise all his misquotes.
> As I said I gave up at 100.
Right. And so we're just to believe your assertion and not believe
Woodmorappe. He has hundreds of quotes and you got zip. I didn't ask for ALL
his mis-quotes, just the 100 you say you found. No documentation, no evidence,
nothing to say.
> On the Talk Origins site Steve Schimmerich - an evangelical Geologist who has
> taught for Wheaton College has a discussion of Woodmarappe, though that is not
> his real name and some of the correspondence between them.
I was the go-between between Schimmerich's email list and Woodmorappe at that
time. I wasn't impressed with Schimmerich then and certainly not now.
> As I said when he retracts his distortions and Austin stops doing the same
> then I will be willing to listen. Until then I have my doubts about their
> competence and their sincerity.
You have no evidence, just assertions. Why should I take you seriously?
> Suggestion of apparent age of the earth are abhorrent as if God did that then
> he is a liar and unworthy of worship. Period.
Not at all.
It seems to me that we can define "Old Earth" or the "appearance of age" to
meant a complete and balanced environmental system with all it's parts and
cycles in place. In other words, there would be mature vegetation and animals,
blossoms and fruit. etc.
With this definition I see 8 possibilities:
1. God creates a world and much later in time, when the world and it's
ecosystem were indeed old, he then creates the first humans, then:
a. If God did not communicate to the humans about the age of the biosphere,
but created them with an artificial memory of previous existence, having no
knowledge that they had been created but 5 seconds ago, they would then believe
that the biosphere was old. Would such an artificial memory be ethical?
b. If God did not communicate to the humans about the age of the biosphere,
and not having an artificial memory of a previous existence, they would then be
free to arrive at their own conclusions as to the age of the biosphere. What
God actually did is irrelevant.
c. If God communicated (assuming they had no artificial memory) that the
biosphere was old, then He would be teaching truth and be trustworthy.
d. If God communicated (assuming they had no artificial memory) that the
biosphere was young though appearing old, then He would not be teaching truth.
2. God creates a complete, balance environmental system with the appearance of
age in just a few earth rotations and at the same time He created the first
humans, then:
a. If God did not communicate to the humans about the age of the biosphere,
but created them with an artificial memory of previous existence, having no
knowledge that they had been created but 5 seconds ago, they would then believe
that the biosphere was old. Would such an artificial memory be ethical?
b. If God did not communicate to the humans about the age of the biosphere,
and not having an artificial memory of a previous existence, they would then be
free to arrive at their own conclusions as to the age of the biosphere. What
God actually did is irrelevant.
c. If God communicated (assuming they had no artificial memory) that the
biosphere was old, then He would not be teaching truth.
d. If God communicated (assuming they had no artificial memory) that the
biosphere was young though appearing old, then He would be teaching truth.
Has God communicated with us? Has he told us truth? It seems to me that the
Biblical record, i.e. God's communication to us, gives us option 2d.
I curious, is it possible to create a fully functioning biosphere that looks
young? Can a balanced ecosystem be created to appear young?
Allen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 04 2003 - 02:10:14 EDT