Re: YEC defined
Allen Roy (email@example.com)
Fri, 12 Mar 1999 21:29:08 -0700
> From: David Campbell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> However, often the evidence itself is denied. Usually this seems to
> reflect ignorance, coupled with erroneous assumptions about what to
> For example, claims that the geologic column was invented in support of
> evolution ignore two lines of evidence. First, there is the historical
> evidence that the geologic column was developed before Darwin published
> Origin of Species. Secondly, there is the physical evidence of the
> in the earth. The existence of this evidence is at least implicitly
> acknowledged by those advocates of flood geology who try to present an
> explanation of how the Flood could have created the appearance of a
> geologic column. To present such a model does not necessarily deny the
> evidence, as Allen points out, but to juxtapose such a model with the
> that the geologic column is merely the product of atheistic self-delusion
> is self-contradictory as well as denying evidence.
I recognize what I prefer to call the geologic record. This is the
physical evidence of the rock layers and the fossils which they contain. I
accept such things as the law of super position. However, I consider the
geologic column an interpretation of the evidence. The geologic column is
the merging of the physical evidence with the interpretation of eras,
periods, epochs and assigned ages.
> >The reason for this is that death (of man and animal, but not of
> >as interpreted from the witness evidence, never happened on the planet
> >throughout the universe) prior to the fall of man.
> Unless one follows the interpretations of Augustine, Calvin, Buckland, or
> various other pre-1859 commentators as well as many later ones.
The views of Augustine, Calvin and Buckland (who ever he is) have never be
very important in my Christianity. I find it interesting that I have had
probably the most heated discussion on theology as any with Calvinistic