Re: 18th Century Geologist reaction to ancient earth

18th Century Geologist reaction to ancient earthThanks for this. I was away from Thursday giving a paper on Design to CIS came home and was in bed and have just resurfaced.

David gives a useful account of some early 19th century geologists, but does not seem to be familiar with the work of Geologists and theologians before his Smith date of 1799. It gave me a sense of personal deja vu as it is roughly what I held some 20 years ago and changed my mind largely triggered off by Haydn's Creation! I had to do a lot of reading in French for the 18th century

I will make several points.

1. Smith was one of many geologists and old earth preceded him by decades and in fact after he worked out the use of fossils in the Swan pub and surroundings in 1795 he was young earth for several years (chronicled by Hugh Torrens in various works - if you have Winchester then put it on the fire!)

2. The best book to read after the bible is Martin Rudwick's Bursting the Limits of Time (Cornell 2005) (BUY IT ) who deals with the period 1780 -1830 demonstrating that old earth was almost universal among savants in 1780 - he begins with de Saussure and Mt Blanc. The controversy before 1800 was between an eternal earth (of which Hutton was accused of and may not be true)and an earth of many tens of thousands as argued by the Christian savant de Luc. It was very enjoyable as a travelogue as I have been to most of the places in France Alps Naples etc

3. From 1620s many Christians went in for a form of the Gap Theory eg Grotius, Mersenne, Bacon and thus went for more time . (article accepted in a Geol Soc of London Special Publication , Myth and Geology)

4. From 1660 or so the Theories of the earth allowed an extended gap so had creation>>4004BC article in Evangelical Quarterly April 2002.

5. Most theologians in the 18th century held to a similar view with a minority accepting a strict YE. This was Europe wide. (in geol soc article)

6. I also have an article on the period 1800 to 1855 in the Churchman 1998 which I think is on the ASA site. In this I struggled as I was unfamiliar with what happened before 1800 then.

7. an essential book is Geol Soc of London (not to be confused with its baby brother GSA!)Spec Publication The age of the Earth 4004BC to 2002AD ed Lewis and Knell, with both historical papers Rudwick's is the best of a good bunch closely followed by Torrens

8. I am convinced we need to look closely at before 1800 as the alternative and inaccurate YEC history of geology as we find in Mortenson accepts that most Christians succumbed to the evil Enlightenment after 1800 and compromised Scripture. These views are unsustainable as all the components were there before Steno did early geology in 1660

Michael

PS to David . If my articles are difficult to locate then I can email them. I look forward to more and will use your web books

----- Original Message -----
  From: Mccarrick, Alan D CIV NSWCCD Philadelphia, 9212
  To: ACG ; ASA List
  Cc: Michael Roberts ; Ted Davis ; Randy Isaac ; David C. Bossard
  Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 2:26 PM
  Subject: 18th Century Geologist reaction to ancient earth

  I had the opportunity to attend a lecture at Biblical Seminary given by Dr David Bossard entitled "The Stones Cry Out: How Early Christian Geologists Enlarged Their Understanding of the Creation Account."

  His goal was not an evaluation of the "correctness" of the views he reported, but rather just to document their thinking in the face of the growing evidence that the earth is ancient. He maintains a large site of old geology and theology works at www.geology.19thcenturyscience.org or for a wider range of documents www.19thcenturyscience.org The question and answer session was good and I had a chance to talk with Dr Bossard for a few minutes afterwards.

  I though the talk was quite good (although it was not accompanied with any visuals). His position was that prior to the discoveries that he chronicles there was little to move theologians and geologists off the position of a young earth. When the scientific evidence appeared, most of the geologists (orthodox Christians many) felt forced to move to other positions and propose various interpretations of Genesis. What was very interesting was that many views one hears are presented without any reference to the fact that the ideas are NOT new.

  I would suggest looking at the document (at <http://www.ibri.org/in-progress/57StonesCryOut.html> and his own website for yourselves.

  He did not seem to know either Ted or Michael. I think you guys would love to share ideas. He is not a geologist by training, but appears to have done his homework and his web site appears to be a great resource for complete old works.

  Ted, I sent him to your web site at Messiah, so I hope you might be able to communicate.

  Michael, I also mentioned your name, and suggested he contact you.

  I am also sending this to David.

  Alan McCarrick
Received on Wed Mar 22 16:09:59 2006