From: skroger@zeus.calpoly.edu (Seth L. Kroger)
Subject: Re: Young earth creationist logic NOT!
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:52:47 GMT

jloucks@uts.amdahl.com (Jim Loucks) writes:
>danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock) writes:
>>   So what you're saying is that you cannot answer the question, "why is God
>>trying to decieve us?" except by praying that the person will stop asking the
>>question?  Jim, by ducking this question so completely you impeach the
>>reasonablness of your views.  
>
>We're not communicating, again. My posting was a reply to someone 
>calling God an "asshole" for "dicking with the information." My remark
>about praying for those who believe such may have been unnecessary, 
>but in no way was it a plea to stop asking questions, but rather to
>realize that God, in my opinion, has not intentionally deceived us.
>Does that clarification help?

No, this just shows that you aren't thinking very clearly.  More below.

>>   Lets check it out again.  The world looks really old to most people that
>>study ways of figuring out how old the earth is.  The ones that don't see the
>>earth as old have leaders that are foresworn to their God to lie, cheat,
>>equivocate or whatever it takes to put their view across[1].  Clearly the
>>world looks old when not viewed through the blinders of fanaticism.
>
>Once again, we must be carefully consider all evidence and weigh the
>worldview and bias of everyone.

Yes.  And I would necessarily junk anything said by people who take such an
oath as mentioned above.

>>   Now Jim tells us that the world is _really_ only 6-10k years old.  We ask
>>him why God chose to decieve us and he says "I'll pray for you".  Dis-gusting
>>intellectual dis-honesty.  Clean it up or leave, Jim.  The earth _is_ old and 
>>God almost certianly isn't a liar.
>
>I don't believe I've ever made such a statement. As previously stated,
>it is my belief that life on earth is fairly young, the earth may or
>may not be old. It is also my belief that God could have easily created
>with the appearance of age, though most definitely not to deceive. If
>God created a 100 foot tree, would it not have the appearance of age?
>If such a tree were created, I have no problems with God also creating
>tree rings if he so desired. Nobody asked me why God chose to deceive
>us, but rather why an asshole dicked with the information. That was
>the context of my reply.

By your own illustration, God *did* choose to decieve us.  (Of course
there's more than just a few tree rings to the appearance of age, but the
example is good in general principle.)  In this creation by fiat, God has
made thigns with the appearance of age.  Since God is omnicient, he *would
know* that they would be interpreted as being old, not young.  Since he
consciously chose to make things with the appearance of age,
*he*consciously*chose*to*decieve*us*.  (Of course, that is only how it would
logically work out under *your* beliefs on the matter.)

>I hope this helps clear up any miscommunication.
>
>-- 
>Jim Loucks           jloucks@uts.amdahl.com 
>{apple, pyramid, sun, uunet}!amdahl!jloucks


|======================================================================|
| Seth Kroger                       "If God made us in His image we    |
| skroger@pan.calpoly.edu               have certianly returned the    |
| Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo             compliment."  -Voltaire        |
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:14577 talk.origins:9696