9. Why Do People Not Believe that Evolution Happened? ==>
   9.3. Specious Arguments Against Evolution ==>
     9.3.2. Nature of specious arguments ==> Arguments of Last Resort ==> God Gave The Appearance Of Age ==> Philosophical Meanderings

Saving the Appearances

Galileos critics claimed his images were just illusions induced by the glass lenses, and seen only by his unwillingness to hear absolute TRUTH.

Galileos heresy was not that he thought the earth moved, but that he thought saving the appearances had to do with ascertaining reality.

What about the God Factor?

* If God can create an illusion of age with mature Adam, water to wine, virgin birth, etc.,

o without violating His nature as True;

o then, He can allow an illusion of age by creating a fully functional mature earth,

o also without violating His nature as True.

* Irrelevant:

o Supernovas, etc., are natural events, not miracles

o The evidence of antiquity is not about things which were new but fully functional at creation, like Adam

o Its about a bunch of worn out, dead or dying junk

o Evidence of time is recorded by decay processes long after once being created new

Heres a nice, brand new car.

Thats not new, thats an old piece of junk.

No really, it just appears old because it was made in a perfectly mature state just last week.

No -- thats an old piece of junk.

What ? You think Grand Ole Clunkers couldnt make a new car that looks old?

Who are you trying to fool - were not buying it.

Grand Ole Clunkers


Concept Car

"Adam was created mature, thus he would have an appearance of age."

* Genesis presents Adam as a man, not a child.

* Had the appearance of exactly what he was:

o a newly created living adult.

+ full size, not an infant

+ fully developed organs, strength, body functions

+ not a worn-out, decaying body

+ new teeth, not worn off by 20+ years of chewing

+ new skin, not weathered by 20+ years of exposure

+ new corneas, not damaged by 20+ years of UV

+ no healed-over scars, or previously broken bones

+ no "childhood memories" of a non-existant "history" such as having parents, (no graves or bodies of parents either)

But Adam was created mature thus he would have had an appearance of age.

Adam doesnt apply to the type of evidence available.

If you try to sell a Model T as a new car

It looks like this.

The physical evidence shows actual passage of time,

as recorded by plain physical deterioration.

(by ongoing decay that has nothing to do with the creation events)

The evidence DOESNT look like this.

People will know youre a crook !

The universe and earth are just crammed full of this kind of old JUNK that has worn out after creation.

Adam may have been an adult, but he wasnt old, worn out, or dead.


Dead and dying stars

Stacks of dead coral

Worn out rocks

Stacks of erosion sediments

Layers of dead animal fossils

Layers of dead plant fossils

Ripped apart continents

Decay of orbital motions

Decay of the elements


Appearance of Newly Created Rock?


* Solid, not liquid; cooled, not hot.

* Isotopic abundances of newly cooled rock

o lots of U-238, K-40, Rb-87, Np-237

o very little Pb-206, Ar-40, Sr-87, Bi-208

* Not already eroded, weathered, changed

o No short-term annual layers (varves)

o No accumulations into long-term layering

o No long-term accumulations of chemical layers (e.g., salts)

o Not metamorphosed by long duration heat/pressure

* Not embedded with fossils of dead organisms

o no large-scale embedded fossils of plants and animals

o no microfossils such as comprise limestone and chalk


Appearance of Age = Real Age

* AoA concedes the point: it really does look old

o SN1987a is real history spanning168,000 years

o Fossils are real history spanning real time

* Okay, maybe it's 10,000 yr. instead of 6000

* Once you step away from 4004 BC

o (i.e., a strict adding up of genealogical ages)

o it doesnt really matter how big the step is:

o 10 thousand or 100 thousand, 10 million or 10 billion

* Creation is Creation -- regardless of when

Where is the Scripture?

Where is the scripture where God says He created with the illusion of antiquity in every piece of physical evidence man might ever discover?

Explain to the astronomer how the starlight hes sees from SN1987a isnt real history (since its too old), and then convince him that the stars show the handiwork of the God of Truth, who just made it appear that way.

Explain how to use any natural evidence as real evidence of anything, especially as evidence of the Divine nature.

Its not deception because the Bible tells us the true situation.

* That is EXACTLY the problem with AoA.

* It REQUIRES that one already accept the Bible, in order to come to know basic truth about nature.

* Whereas the BIBLE explicitly says one can know the truth about Gods divine nature from the study of the creation itself, independent of scripture.

* Romans 1:19-20 argues for nature as the prima-facie apologia for God.

* The Bible nowhere says God made nature to continually give a false appearance of history.

We wont accept false history for Gods written revelation.

We shouldnt be promoting false history for Gods natural revelation.

Using Appearance of Age cuts the heart out of the Teleological Argument

Have you ever used the

Intelligent Design Argument ?

Romans 1:19-20

Horns of the Apparent Dilemma

* Intelligent Design - (Romans 1:19-20)

o Assumes that the observables of the natural system accurately reflect the systems origin.

o Natural system exhibits Intelligent Design.

o Conclusion:

Origin of the natural system was an Intelligent Designer.

* Appearance of Age - (Gosses 1856 Omphalos)

o Assumes that the observables of the natural system are contradicted by its origins.

o Natures designs may appear old, but arent.

* Dilemma:

Nature may appear to be designed, but its only apparent design, not real design, no real Designer.

Is God Just An Illusion?

When God turned water into wine,

it didnt just appear to be wine,

it really was wine.

No time confusion -- the change was witnessed !

Since God made the creation to evidence His nature for those who did not see it happen, the evidence of creation cant be an illusion either.

Because its appearance is the only witness it provides at all. That witness must be trustworthy.

Creation must appear to be exactly what it is.

If even a part of nature is an illusion, its entire apologetic value falls into question.

If nature is just an illusion, what about Gods reality?

Appearance of Age is not a suitable apologetic for God.

AoA has the appearance of

Postmodernistic Gnostic Babble

How can we know when age is a consequence of mature creation?

* Whenever it evidences too much age!

o Tautology

o Non Falsifiable (recall Poppers criteria)

* Can just as easily argue that creation occurred 10 seconds ago, and all evidence to the contrary is just an illusion of the recent creation

o That which proves too much …

I reject Appearance of Age as unscriptural and destructive to the spread of the gospel.

If its really young, then one will convince me (and most other scientists) based on physical evidence, not by using metaphysical maneuvers and rhetorical sophistry.

Youth Dogma

* Cannot be old

* only apparent age

* claims scientific status

* creedal dogma

* observes seven miles of strata, sees an inch of time

* says of non-YECs

godless evolutionists

Destructive Ideology

Evolution Dogma

* Cannot be created

* only apparent design

* claims factual status

* ideological naturalism

* observes DNA complexity, sees an accident

* says of creationists

idiotic flat earthers

Both are destructive for all the same reasons.

How old is the creation?

Whats the Answer?



In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth

In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth


But what about using internal inferences and external correlation to date the creation?

Some Bibles list dates in the margins, with the Creation of humankind calculated at 4,004 B.C. Those figures are no part of the biblical text, but reflect the calculations of a Bishop Ussher of Ireland, who lived from 1581-1655 and who based his work on various genealogical lists contained in Scripture.

Ussher assumed that all the lists of generations were complete, something we now know not to be true. The genealogy found in Matthew 1:1-17 skips three generations to state that Joram begat Uzziah, his great-great grandson. A genealogical list in Ezra 7:3 omits six generations, as compared to the list found in First Chronicles 7. For the ancient Hebrews, son also meant descendant, and bore or begat meant somewhere down the line. The purpose of biblical genealogies was not to provide a precise time-line but to show descent, tribal origins or royal lineage.

The Bible does not answer all our questions, but it tells us everything we need to know to accomplish the purpose for which it is given. That purpose is to reveal God -- ultimately and most clearly in Jesus of Nazareth -- and to show us our place in the universe, in relation to God, to the rest of creation, and to each other. It shows us that sin is our fault, not God's, and that salvation from all sin's effects is God's initiative and not ours. Scripture points us to a relationship with the Rock of Ages. It does not tell us the ages of the rocks. E. Fudge, gracEmail (age of the earth), EdFudge.com

On Bible Genealogies

See Wm. Henry Greens

Primeval Chronology


Daniel King, Sr.*

The Primeval Chronology

citing Wm. Henry Greens conclusions in agreement watchmanmag.com, April 99

"On these various grounds we conclude that the Scriptures furnish no data for a chronological computation prior to the life of Abraham; and that the Mosaic records do not fix and were not intended to fix the precise date either of the Flood or of the Creation of the world.


* PhD Theology - Vanderbilt; young earth advocate; critic of Roberts, LIB & Florida College, where King formerly taught

The Problem with Dates?

* Assumptions

* Scientific uncertainty

* Biblical silence (no data)

* Our fallibility: Science & Biblical

* Whatever date you want, you can find some expert witness to support it.

Creation may yet prove to be recent...

But what if the earth really is very old?

Would you then reject the Bible?

The pews say no,

but many pulpits teach yes.

Whats the Answer ?



There is no statement in the Bible which indicates the age of the earth...if the scientists or pseudo-scientists want to ascribe to the earth the age of a million, a billion, or three hundred billion I will not pause to argue now. In the beginning God is all the Bible affirms on the question. Foy E. Wallace, Jr.

Dont Really Know

Gods Prophetic Word, 1960

John Klotz

Genes, Genesis & Evolution 1970

"What shall we say, then, about the age of the earth? We shall have to say that Scripture gives us no exact dates before the time of Abraham. It is impossible to give an exact date for Creation, and we cannot say on the basis of Scripture how old the earth is."

As cited by B.B. Baxter, I Believe Because, 1971

Standard Apologetics text at FC in 70s.

James P. Needham

Faltering Faith and Genesis 1


Do I think the earth is only 10 thousand years old? Heavens no! I don't know how old it is, nor does anyone else. What may surprise some, I don't care how old it is! The earth is like a woman, it doesn't tell its age! The Bible makes no effort whatsoever to tell us its age. It simply says, "In the beginning God..." That says everything that needs to be said. If science could prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the earth is 10 billion years old, it would not conflict with "In the beginning God..." That expression will fit a young earth, or an old one. God foresaw all these wild speculations, so He made a "fits all" declaration that will never be contradicted by so-called science, or the real thing. Job said, If man "will contend with him [God], he cannot answer him one of a thousand."(Job 9:3). God's word is tried (Psalms 18:30), true (John 17:17), and forever settled in heaven.(Psalms 119:89), and he who trifles with its text does so at their own peril (Revelation 21:18,19)."Let God be true and every man a liar"(Romans 3:4).

WebArticle @ www.geocities.com/dmathew1/gen12/needham.htm

James P. Needham

Harmony of Science and Scripture


WebArticle @ Gospelanchor.com

The bottom line to this problem is simple: Since the Bible does not tell us the age of the earth, then there is no lack of harmony between it and the so-called discoveries of modern science. It matters not how old they say the earth is, the Bible says, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth..." That fits any figure they come up with. If it is 4.5 billion years old, which I seriously doubt, the Bible still says, "In the beginning God created..."

Jere E. Frost

The Bible on Origin of Matter 1967

The Bible does not tell us when the beginning was, and hence there can be no estimating of the age of the earth from Genesis record. Nor is there any evidence as to how long an expanse of time transpired from the beginning of verse one until the time of Gods saying let there be light. But the Bible does tell us that the universe had a beginning and is not eternal.

In the beginning God explains the origin of life, matter and the vast universe in a manner that is both rational and in harmony with scientific principles.

Pine Hills Exhorter, March 6, 1967

Argument for Evolution, Pine Hills Exhorter, October 1970

… Besides, the age of the earth is irrelevant, for it neither proves evolution nor disproves creation, nor does the Bible say anything about the age of the earth (or of man, Ussher to the contrary notwithstanding). The question is not age, but origin. Not when, but how? God producing order, or chance and time producing evolution?

Hill Roberts, 1975-2001

In the beginning God is all the Bible affirms on the question.

The Bible makes no effort whatsoever to tell us its age. It simply says, "In the beginning God...

The Scriptures furnish no data for a chronological computation prior to the life of Abraham.

Since the Bible does not tell us the age of the earth, then there is no lack of harmony between it and the discoveries of modern science.

The Bible does not tell us when the beginning was, and hence there can be no estimating of the age of the earth from Genesis record. Nor is there any evidence as to how long an expanse of time transpired from the beginning of verse one until the time of Gods saying let there be light.

The age of the earth is irrelevant, for it neither proves evolution nor disproves creation.

The question is not age, but origin.

A Personal Puzzle

Why is it okay for some to make those points, but its not okay for others ?

Apparently these conclusions weve just read are perfectly acceptable as long as one believes its young,

but become suspect if one actually thinks the balance of evidence strongly favors antiquity.

Beware of anyone who claims the integrity of the Bible and your doctrinal soundness hangs on having a correct answer for the age of the earth:

the Bible does not say

If you must have an answer to this question, you must learn to read Gods other revelation.

The Creation Itself

When science gives ANY age for the universe, earth, and man, it is affirming the fact of a beginning…

Affirming Creation

But real antiquity would require me to rethink my interpretation of Genesis 1.

It might.

Take heart:

The world didnt fly out of orbit when it moves not became better understood.

Given that

neither side can produce the definitive Bible passage for the age of the earth

* Is this matter really a Bible issue?

* Does faithfulness really depend on having the correct answer to questions of how old is it?

* Since it doesnt have a definitive Bible answer, should we be drawing lines of fellowship around it?

* Couldnt our Bible study time be better spent ?

* Since the Bible offers no data, would it be okay for science to have its opinion in peace?

* If science helped one to better understand some aspect of scripture wouldnt that be a good thing?

o Illustrate the span of Gods hand, Isaiah 40:12

o How long between the OT & NT?

o When did Jerusalem fall? When did exile end?

o OT dates established from Assyrian Kings lists & eclipse data

o Who were the Assyrians, the Chaldeans, the Canaanites?

o When and where did Abraham live?

o How do you know any Bible geography?

o How did you learn the meaning of Greek words? Hebrew?

o Exegete Psalms 104:5 It will not move forever and ever.

o What meaneth In the beginning ?

* Physical space-time has a caused breshith

o the Cause of all physical effects cannot logically be any physical Effect

* Transcendent Cause - bara Elohim

* Time ordered cause and effect - Purpose

* Purpose implies Person

* Transcendent Personal Purposed Beginning

o requires a Transcendent Purposeful Beginner

* Transcendent Purposeful Beginner

o We anticipate, hope for, communication, revelation

o Seekers promised they will find -- Matt 7:7

Whenever anyone affirms any age of the universe, they are supporting the veracity of the boldest declaration in the Bible

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.


I Believe

Suggested Resources

Concerning Genesis Interpretation

H. Roberts, Outlines for Genesis 1 - 3, Lordibelieve.org/genesis , 2001.

H. Roberts, Evidences That Have Led Many Scientists to Accept An Ancient Date of Creation of the Earth and Universe, Lordibelieve.org/page15.html, 1998.

H. Blocher, In The Beginning:The Opening Chapters of Genesis, IVP, 1984.

E. J. Young, In The Beginning, Banner of Truth Trust, 1976.

G. Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Zondervan, 1982.

J. Sailhammer, Genesis Unbound, Multnomah, 1996.

P. Eichman, Understanding Evolution: A Christian Perspective, DoesGodExist?, 1984.

Moreland & Reynolds, Three Views on Creation and Evolution, Zondervan, 1999.

A. Hayward, Creation and Evolution, Bethany House, 1984.


Self explanatory.