Explaining the apparent age of the earth: YEC Ken Coulson rejects "appearance of age," AiG responds
“Coulson is offering a new mature creation apologetic that basically says that God has only ever used ‘natural’ processes to create, but during creation week he sped up those processes.” - AiG
- 22 views
I appreciate AiG’s irenic tone and overall fairness in responding to Coulson, but the thinness of their rebuttal has me more interested in Coulson’s view.
In the rebuttal, AiG doesn’t seem to offer a clear alternative view. Their sub-headline says “The idea that God created a young earth that looked old has insurmountable problems,” but I thought was pretty much AiG’s view. So… I’m puzzled. The article does imply that the evidence of old earth isn’t really that substantial. So maybe AiG’s view isn’t “the earth is young and only looks old” but more like “the earth doesn’t really look old”? Both of these views have huge hurdles to overcome, but “only looks old” doesn’t seem to be a fair summary of Coulson’s view. He speaks for himself here: https://www.creationunfolding.com/creation-or-evolution
Though “operational [present day] science vs. historical science” seems like a valid distinction to me, you can only milk so much out of that principle.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Discussion