Re: RATE Vol. II

RE: RATE Vol. IIJoel Duff wrote:

I think we may look back at the publication of this work as a watershed moment in the history of creation science movement. It seems we have here the clearest expression of something that seems to have been inevitable; the admission that evidence (in this case radioctive decay) is most simply interpreted as supportive of an old earth. So often I hear how "all the evidence" points to a young earth but now we see even more clearly that only when one presumes a young earth does any of the evidence support a young earth though even that is highly debatable.

It seems that by openly admitting that the evidence supports an old earth if the Scriptures aren't consulted it calls into question the wisdom of creation scientists using creation as a tool of evangelism. Haven't they wanted to be able to say: look at this evidence of the Flood and a young earth, now believe the Bible. If the evidence without an a priori Biblical position doesn't say the earth is young how can they contiue to use young earth studies as an evangelistic tool?

I had similar visions but I seriously doubt whether it will turn out that way. Despite the clear statements in the summary chapter of the unsolved problems, the final paragraph continues to assert that the groundbreaking new results once again reaffirm the validity of the Bible. Knowing the right answer ahead of time provides confidence that the remaining unsolved problems will be solved. Conferences and books and videos proclaim the result of RATE as showing the validity of the young-earth position. Statements that the RATE scientists published in the $79.99 version of the 800 page technical report won't be read by many people in the pews. They will rely on the translation provided in the "Thousands...Not Billions" book which has the conclusion right in the title. No need to read further.

Sadly,

Randy
Received on Sat May 20 21:22:11 2006