Re: My Daughter is a YEC

From: Vernon Jenkins (
Date: Mon May 27 2002 - 18:03:58 EDT

  • Next message: Vernon Jenkins: "Re: My Daughter is a YEC"


    In your several references to the 'water to wine' miracle, why should
    you consider it necessary to require carbon dating of the finished product?
    Surely the fact of apparent age is manifest in John 2:10, when the master
    of the banquet tells the bridegroom: "Everyone brings out the choice wine
    first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink;
    but you have saved the best till now."

    The fact that this was not some cheap plonk points clearly to the reality
    of apparent age. Not only had the alchohol been created miraculously, but
    that it was excellent wine implies a lengthy maturation process, where
    all kinds of complex and subtle chemical reactions take place over a long
    period of time, which improves the character of the wine.

    Regarding the creation: clearly, as an <i>ex nihilo</i> event,&nbsp;
    it surely merits the title <i>miracle</i> and, further can be justly regarded
    as a <i>sign</i> of God's supreme abilities. You appear to associate me
    with traditional YEC when you say, " Instead they're continually coming
    up with arguments to try to show that there's scientific evidence for a
    young earth &amp; universe, a procedure that would make no sense if the
    ages were only apparent." No. My approach is rather to believe God's Word
    to be revelation - and to draw from it information that appears to have
    been overlooked in the general stampede to embrace evolution.

    In an earlier post you stated, "The apparent age idea cannot be refuted
    scientifically" and, again, "...there is no philosophical or scientific
    way of showing that the earth didn't come into being at some point in the
    recent past - 6000 years, 15 minutes, or whatever..." I concur.

    Finally, let me refer to your most recent post to me headed, "apparent
    age RIP" (strangely at odds with your earlier views, quoted above!). It
    concerned my reference to the possible implications following the discovery
    of variabilty in what had hitherto been considered a rock-solid constant,
    viz fine structure. While the variation may be small, would you not agree
    that it raises general doubts about man's understanding of natural processes
    - and underlines the folly of placing one's faith in the theories currently
    in fashion?


    <p><A HREF="">>

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 27 2002 - 22:36:33 EDT