Ramona Wijesinghe

If a 6,000 year old earth is the required answer it must be a pretty silly question.

No, there is no such thing as “millions of years ago”.

Has this view been published in any non-creationist journal? Any respected scientist or Acadamy of Science agree with this? Is that why 72 Noble prize winners, plus 17 US state academies of science and 7 other scientific organsiations filed an amicus brief in the US Supreme court against creation science?

Is there any credible scientific organisation that entertains a 6,000 year old earth? W. D. Phillips, a Christian and Nobel Prize winner for Physics in 1997 “I believe that the present calculations of about 4 billion years for the earth and 14 billion years for the universe are not far wrong, and I see no conflict with that understanding and my understanding of the Bible.”

If we bin all that evidence because of a literal interpretation of Genesis ‘days’ so we can have a theodicy for natural evil we are living in la-la land and frankly being intellectually dishonest.

Jesus had himself tortured and executed for a symbolic sin by a non-existent individual.

I never claimed Adam and Eve were symbolic.

I was a young earth creationist myself and like former Institute of Creation Research member Glenn Morton creation science did my faith immense harm. Like the latter it took me to the brink of atheism.

Besides the huge quandry with science and credibility a 6000 year old earth lands you in we still have the central problem of why God permits eg post WW1 flu influenza to wipe out more than 50-100 million people, or a tsunami 250,000 people. Natural evil would occur even if nobody sinned. Genuine enquirers might well ask why did God permit all those innocent people to die on such a scale. Even if we say sin corrupted creation the question still surfaces as to the scale and wantoness of the suffering to people that we Christians say God loves passionately. If we say God loved every single victim of disease and suffering why does he allow them to die in agony? Would you allow your child to die in agony like that if you had the power to stop it? Thus our quandry in the search for a theodicy.

We can all close ranks and indulge in the psychological process of group think (critics would say Stockholm syndrome) but we have to try and find answers from an apologetic perspective in our postmodernist culture. I can agree with Alvin Platinga’s work on the freewill defence for moral evil but what about a theodicy for natural evil?
Im not judging God, I suspect like many others who are interested in apologetics and wishing to know our heavenly father better we just want to understand.

Doug Holland

I wont dwell on the Young Earth viewpoint and it’s horrendous difficulties.

Yet that is the source of your quandary. You are rejecting the answer to your problem.

We have record of cancers in dinosaur bones from millions of years ago, thus death and suffering then.

No, there is no such thing as “millions of years ago”.

I think you’ll find witnessing to the world on 10,000 year old earth and dinosaurs on Noah’s ark a harder struggle and less credible than a natural evil theodicy.

Young-Earth creationists have been doing this for some time now. Intelligent Design proponents, who generally accept the millions of years, have found it just as hard a struggle, and are granted just as little credibility. Less actually (Richard Dawkins):

Oh but of course the story of Adam and Eve was only ever symbolic, wasn’t it? Symbolic?! Jesus had himself tortured and executed for a symbolic sin by a non-existent individual. Nobody not brought up in the faith could reach any verdict other than barking mad!

See also here..
Philip J. Rayment

I too have been following the conversations, and I feel for you! The frustration in trying to put two seemingly polar things (God is love, and death/suffering) together is monstrous at times.

But I am reminded of a video, and I would love it if you could watch it.

www.viddler.com/explore/MaximumReferral/videos/1/

It is called “The Bridge – How Far Would You Go?”

And in an attempt to help you wrestle with these questions, I place this thought out there.

You picture God sitting back with his arms crossed watching people die. You describe a god who does not care, and who is far from our problems. That is not the God of the Bible. The God of the Bible is a loving God who is close to us in our moments of suffering.

So as you think about this, realize that God suffers when His children suffer. That God has gone through much suffering for our sake, and is by no means far from our problems. Make no mistake dear friend, God is not crossing his arms indifferent to our pain, no no, He is suffering greatly with us.

And remember, one day he will wipe away every tear, every hurt, every pain. We will be full, and we will no longer feel the sting of anything in our past. Yes, God lets us suffer, but He suffers with us, and He promises that one day, He will take it all away, as if it never happened.

God bless,
Michelle Guillemaud
Canada

Your post was thought provoking but ‘Natural evil must be a result of moral evil.’ Why?
Now if you are a young earth creationist you get round that but land yourself in a heap of other problems.
Here is the challenge for me as a Christian – how do I justify natural evil? Is it from human rebellion? Well from a old earth perpective disease and suffering were here long before humankind so I doubt that.

Or are you saying that the earth is 6-10,000 years old and dinosaurs were on Noah’s ark? I think you’ll find witnessing to the world on 10,000 year old earth and dinosaurs on Noah’s ark a harder struggle and less credible than a natural evil theodicy.

Doug,
I’ve been following all the comments and feel the pain. How can we deal with natural evil and a God of love? You have two incompatible worldviews in the one head, hence the the conflict. I do applaud you for at least realising the problem. Ultimately you must resolve the question of death and its origins. As for me after 30+ years as an theistic evolutionist I could no longer stand a similar torment. The bible is very clear on the subject, death is the result of Adam (Man) rebellion against God, and its been downhill ever since, just what we see in reality. Evolutionists keep telling us things are getting better, not true, evolution is the great lie, no need to mix Darwinism and biblical christianity.
Your fear of being credible as a follow of Jesus and young earth creationist may not be as difficult as you suspect, many others have survived the conversation. Can I suggest you examine,

The Horse and the Tractor
or
Theistic Evolutionsts

Dallas James, Melbourne

You ask “I am not sure why you insist on hanging on to the idea that suffering and death were there before mankind was”

So are you saying that no dinosaurs were ever killed by another? We have record of cancers in dinosaur bones from millions of years ago, thus death and suffering then. Or are you saying that the earth is 6-10,000 years old and dinosaurs were on Noah’s ark? I think you’ll find witnessing to the world on 10,000 year old earth and dinosaurs on Noah’s ark a harder struggle and less credible than a natural evil theodicy.

Doug Holland

Bill
Thanks for your response I appreciate your words.

Doug Holland

Natural evil must be a result of moral evil. Tas Walker with his creationist viewpoint can make sense of that, where as the comment by another who obviously has still an evolutionary viewpoint showed that they could not.

Doug:

Ursula,
your post was thought provoking but ‘Natural evil must be a result of moral evil.’ Why?

Hey! Fulfilled prediction!

Natural evil is a result of the Fall, which was the result of moral evil. But in your old-age/evolutionary view, you don’t believe that, hence it doesn’t make sense to you.

Doug:

Now if you are a young earth creationist you get round that but land yourself in a heap of other problems.

As opposed to the heap of problems, such as the one being discussed, resulting from belief in long ages?

Ursula:

…the bridge disintegrating, I can’t remember where or when it was. A very small vibration started it all, which then caused more vibrations in other parts, which crossed each other and compounded the effect of the initial vibrations aided by wind.

I suspect that you are thinking of the Tacoma Narrows bridge.

Philip J. Rayment