Dear Editor,
I thought the article on ‘Wonderful Science’ in the November 2016 issue of en was excellent and advocated that people explore more the scientific facts from a biblical point of view by using the material published by the Biblical Creation Trust. I was therefore somewhat dismayed to read the letter from Jonathan Castro in the January 2017 edition of en advocating the idea that the evidence against a recent Creation ‘is simply overwhelming’ and then asking readers to look at the website at rationalwiki.org. This is hardly a neutral or unbiased website, since not only is that site set against a Creation position, it is also set against a Christian position – look for instance at the rationalwiki page on the Bible. Essentially it is a website compiled by humanists who are generally atheists and I would not recommend that any believer should visit that site.
All the points concerning their supposed proofs of the (millions of years old) age of the earth are answered by in-depth articles available at the Answers in Genesis website and other Creation organisations. Specifically, the rocks and fossils are a very great testimony to rapid burial consistent with the Flood. The presence of high-rank coal right across the world is strong testimony to rapid burial of trees and vegetation – indeed there is no real alternative explanation for the ubiquitous presence of high carbon content coal right across the world. Normally vegetation rots when it is dumped on the surface. Pyrolysis (that is the breaking down chemically without the presence of air) demands that the vegetation must have been buried with little oxygen present – just as one would expect in a worldwide flood. These and many other arguments are often brought by Creation scientists who, rather than living in a cocoon (as alleged by Jonathan Castro), are happy to engage with those who disagree. Rather than the young earth position, as advocated by Paul Garner – one of the scientists in the Biblical Creation Trust and author of the New Creationism (Evangelical Press 2009) – being one of retreat, there is in fact a coherence to this position. It makes good sense of the science and is consistent with biblical theology (no death before the Fall) which Old (Genesis 3) and New Testaments (Romans 5/1 Corinthians 15) demand. Another book that he would find helpful is Origins – Examining the Evidence (Truth in Science 2011) by Dr Geoff Barnard, Professor Steve Taylor and myself. I would respectfully ask that Jonathan is open to reconsider his position and read some of the indepth Creation material that is available.
