From: Walter Hicks (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Sep 22 2003 - 23:10:33 EDT
Glenn Morton wrote:
> I simply said they are wrong. That is not condeming all YECs. Can you tell
> me a YEC who is correct in their views? If not, then Walter drop this silly
> line. I said they were wrong, they were doing harm to the faith and unless
> you can point me to a factually correct YEC, I will stand on that view. If
> all 'Italians' are wrong, then it isn't wrong to say so. Get over it.
I will repeat what I have said many times. You can laugh at it and belittle it,
but just shows an unwillingness on your part to think out of your own self
I do a lot of simulations for various things. The original simulated
environment is difficult but I get to use it many times over. It would be
ridiculous for me to to start from scratch each time.
Now, none of us on this list, despite all the pontificating, know diddle about
God's environment and His nature. If he wanted to pay some special attention to
a group of beings that He called "man", it is perfectly possible for Him to
start the works 6000 years ago with the a background simulation already in
place. That is basically what some think the Bible says that he did. This
would not negate anything that you ever said about finding your fossils and oil
Now this would not fit your preconceived notions of God so you reject by saying
it makes God a liar. And others say that your interpretation of the Bible makes
God a liar. Liar, liar, pants on fire -- boy what an intellectual battle!
What I have presented is consistent with a literal interpretation of Genesis
and a young earth theory. I do not like it philosophically but that is a choice
not a scientific conclusion.
People who hold to this view would well be justified in saying that evolution
is not the source of the human race. God created man as a special act,
regardless of what else He set up in the "universe with history" ---- and He
does not lie. The Bible tells us what He did. This universe would be as real a
universe as if he had let it run for 15 billion years prior to now! No
scientific test could tell the difference and you have admitted that many
The strong point of this outlook is that it does not required the convoluted
reasoning that you publish to reconcile your viewpoint of the Bible versus a
more literal interpretation. I know that you don't like this and maybe it is
because it makes your lengthy presentations a house of cards.
So THAT is a YEC viewpoint that I have heard expressed and I think that it as
valid as anything you have ever offered.
I, with you, hate what Burgy calls the "Liars for Jesus" group who construct
false science. But that is no excuse for grouping all YECs together in their
camp. It would make more sense for you to identify your real enemy and stop
jousting at your own strawman. Attack the head of the monster, not every troop
that you meet. I wager that your web presentations loose as many Christians as
YECism ever did.
I think, Glenn, that _you_ are the one who needs to "get over it" and adopt a
Stamp out the ICR and AIG and the monster will fall.
Learn to present evolution in an Christian fashion, instead of ridiculing those
who do not accept what you call facts and Christians may change their minds.
I have read your post at
And I see little correlation between "young earth" and any of the stated
reasons for becoming an atheist. Only one or two came close to that and mostly
they had other problems with the Christian faith and the Bible. In fact I don't
recall seeing the term "young earth" or YEC used anywhere. Did I miss it?
Walt Hicks <email@example.com>
In any consistent theory, there must
exist true but not provable statements.
You can only find the truth with logic
If you have already found the truth
without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Sep 22 2003 - 23:10:51 EDT