Re: Apparent Age: Rethinking Creatio ex Nihilo

Hi,
I think you have to ask yourself what kind of apparent age evidence you
would expect. An illustration might be in order...

Let's take the newly created Adam as an example. I would expect a fully
formed recently created full grown man to have a certain "appearance of
age". But I would not expect to find evidence of a broken arm that had
healed. Nor would I expect to find a missing appendix, with a nicely healed
incision to match. What about cavities in teeth? That would be odd also...
you get the idea. One might refer to these kinds of things as "evidence of
history". Likewise, if the trees in the garden were created instantly out
of nothing, they too would have a certain "appearance of age". But they
should not show evidence of past events that would be unrelated to their
basic nature or function. For example, I would not expect evidence of past
fire scars along with healed over growth. Or, for example, a broken crown
with re-grown leader at the top.

It is very important to point out that this kind of "evidence of history" is
exactly what is seen in the world and universe... evidences of past events,
not just fully formed things. So no, what is actually seen is not "the
reasonable expectation of creation ex nihilo of the YEC order". Such stuff
would indeed be deceptive if the past events didn't actually happen.
-Paul Greaves

----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh Klose" <mrbond@hlfallout.net>

>
> I merely ask "if one extrapolates the YEC Genesis reading on its own
> terms,
> what should be expected?" My conclusion: complete apparent age is neither
> a
> compromise nor a deception; it is the reasonable expectation of creatio ex
> nihilo of the YEC order.
>
> I'd greatly appreciate your thoughts/feedback if you have some time.
>
> -Josh
Received on Mon May 22 03:13:38 2006