"If you mean that God builds in the appearance of age and an evolutionary
history down to the atomic level, I'm sure you're right."
Whether I'm "right" or not, I don't know. What I am saying is that I
THINK if God DID create anything in a "sudden" manner, i.e. not through
mutation/selection processes, that the thing He created, be it a new
organism, or wine at the wedding supper, or food for the 5,000, or
something as ordinary as a stone, must necessarily have been created with
an apparent history. And that fact does not postulate a "liar God." I
hold that an analysis of the Cana beverage done with scientific integrity
would have found evidences of grape picking and fermentation that never
happened. Analysis of the fish and bread at the 5,000 man picnic would
have shown evidences of farming and fishing that were imaginary. Most of
the fish served that day had never seen water! As you bite into one of
those fish, would you consider the ONE who provied it a liar because you
encountered a fish bone? Of course not!
Wich leads me to the conclusion that, given the ICR position is correct,
no amount of "science" can ever show it. Less to my liking, but still it
seems this way, is that the "Progressive Creation" position is also of
this nature -- possibly true -- but no "science" will ever have a chance
of showing it.
Still less to my liking is the conclusion that the TE position is of a
similar sort. What I see Phil Johnson doing is testing that position. And
that is interesting, though I don't expect success.
Burgy