Re: YEC defined

David Campbell (
Mon, 15 Mar 1999 12:28:47 -0400

>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 reference I was particularly criticizing falsely claimed that the
layers containing simpler fossils were assigned to the bottom because of
evolutionary presuppositions. The layers containing simpler fossils were
assigned to the bottom because they were on the bottom, and only later was
any evolutionary significance attached. Also, most of the eras, periods,
and the like were established before widespread acceptance of evolution. I
was using "geologic column" loosely to apply to both your geologic record
and geologic column, but neither can be truthfully said to have been
invented in support of biological evolution.

>> >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 been
>very important in my Christianity. I find it interesting that I have had
>probably the most heated discussion on theology as any with Calvinistic

All of them, working from the witness evidence, concluded that the death of
animals was not a consequence of the fall of man. Buckland was a prominent
paleontologist, somewhat eccentric, of the 1800's who wrote an extensive
paper on the lack of Scriptural evidence for the death of animals being a
part of man's fall.

David C.