As I see it, the bottom line on OEC is this: The Earth and its rocks only look old WHEN WE APPROACH THEM WITH CERTAIN PRESUPPOSITIONS. These assumptions/presuppositions are wrong, but if someone is determined to hang on to them rather than believe God’s Word then the Lord is hardly likely to suffer such a fool gladly.

Reid

The piece in question is here:
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~emcd/BTRBFB1of3_condensed.htm

…and I’d be extremely eager to hear your thoughts on it – and to know if you have come across anyone else who has made this point.

Many thanks in anticipation!

You wrote: “Nonetheless, I am convinced that many Spirit-filled believers are incorrect about certain truths regarding the creation that some scientists know the true facts about.” Couldn’t agree more. No question that being a Christian doesn’t shield you from being stupid. I how I wish it did!

Also, I’m not saying the appearance-of-age theory HAS to be the answer, but what I am saying is that one does not have to sacrifice either logic, science or a literal reading of the Scripture to arrive at an answer. There may be a better resolution yet. Who knows?

At the same time, I read an neat article in Scientific American a while back, in the column where they compare scientific statments from 50 years ago, 100 years ago, etc. And the scientific proof that a man could not possibly survive moving faster than 50 miles an hour was once universally held as uncontrovertible. I’m not as ready to jump on the “science has discovered” bandwagon, especially when there is a philosphical axe to grind. Many Christians may be working with skewed science, but enough scientists are liars and unwilling to accept ANY evidence for anything supernatural, that I’m not ready to say their “discoveries” are quite that solid. Time will tell – eh?

On to Ross’s quote again: “Taken to its logical conclusion, the appearance-of-age hypothesis would imply that we cannot establish the actuality of our own or others’ past existence. We could have been created just a few hours ago with the Creator implanting scars, memory, progeny, photographs, material possessions, liver spots, hardening of the arteries to make us appear and feel older than we really are. Also, if God built into the universe natural testimony of events which never took place, how can we claim the Bible is free of written testimony of events which never took place?”

His fatal reasoning error here is twofold. 1. He forgets that God TELLS us the purpose of the representation – to “declare the glory of God.” and 2. That God gives us propositional truth in His Word by which we know the reality of history because He has revealed it as such. There is no danger that we were created a few minutes ago with implanted memories BECAUSE GOD SAYS IT ISN’T SO. You see Ross is at his heart an empiricist. Empiricism makes for bad philosophy. I am a Scripturalist. Truth can ONLY be truly known based upon Biblical revelation. I can only “know” for certain what God has SAID. I can make some reasonable judgements extrapolating upon that revelation – but that is not as certain as the revelation itself. And lastly I can guess. Now science examining the universe apart from God’s propositional truth can at best arrive at some guesses. But science cannot “know” unless it believes what God reveals. And once again, the universe is not designed to reveal itself – but Him. Ross’s fear is an unfounded one. Why? Because God tells us differently in his Word, and His Word is truth. His fear is based upon a lack of it.

Thanks for your thoughtful response to those pages. I think the most compelling argument, for me at least, in Ross’s criticism of the appearance-of-age theory can be found in the following quotation from “Creation and Time,”: “Taken to its logical conclusion, the appearance-of-age hypothesis would imply that we cannot establish the actuality of our own or others’ past existence. We could have been created just a few hours ago with the Creator implanting scars, memory, progeny, photographs, material possessions, liver spots, hardening of the arteries to make us appear and feel older than we really are. Also, if God built into the universe natural testimony of events which never took place, how can we claim the Bible is free of written testimony of events which never took place?” The scenario described above would make a great Twilight Zone episode, but what it points to in light of this discussion is that young earth creationism is untenable because, for one thing, taken to its logical end, one must deny physical reality in order to believe it. Ironically, it’s very similar to evolutionism in that regard. I always find it slightly amusing that young earth creationists and macro-evolutionists are very similar creatures, each beginning with a rather preposterous conclusion and then attempting to twist the facts in order to make them conform to their respective error.

I think, though, the danger to the church from young earth creationism can be found in the following quotation from “Creation and Time,”: “Ironically, while young-earth creationists often and sometimes loudly demand equal accesss in the secular arena, such as public schools, they are often quick to deny it to others in the Christian arena. They don’t seem to recognize their actions as an expression of elitism…The fear that incites this denial of reality and this retreat to elitism must be addressed. It’s a fear that runs deeper and wider than the specific case of creation time scales. Underlying all the so-called links between old-earth views and godlessness is the fear that science research may someday uncover some fact about the universe, earth, or life that clearly contradicts the Bible’s message. Nature may tell us something-if not long ages for the cosmos and life, something else-that inescapably disagrees with what God has said in His Word. Then where will the Christian’s faith be?
“As long as this possibility exists in believers’ minds, it will hamper their experiencing the freedom and fearlessness God makes available to us by His Spirit. ‘God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind’ (2 Timothy 1:7, NKJV). A sound mind accepts reality, physical and spiritual, not to mention emotional.”

Now, Reid, I have never observed this fear in you, but I can definitely say that I have witnessed young earth creationists propagating this fear among large congregations.

Regarding the delusions God sends, I believe they are mainly limited to matters of spiritual perception. We may end up disagreeing on this one for a long time. Thanks for the discussion!