Response to Creationist 3

3. “Is it completely illogical that the earth was created mature? i.e. trees created with rings… Adam created as an adult…”

Again, 3’s question gives us an insight into how he tries, and fails, to understand the world.

No, it’s not “completely illogical” to suppose that the world popped into existence instantly, with adult humans and prefab trees: at least, not in the sense of “logically inconsistent” whereby a round square with three sides is impossible, but a purple centaur made of broccoli is perfectly valid.

It’s not completely illogical to suppose that the sun won’t rise tomorrow morning, either, but our experience of mornings has given us thousands of cases with a 100% success rate at sunrises, and we’ve even gathered other data to construct a general theory of sunrises which will help us to predict when they will eventually stop.

My point is, the application of pure logic isn’t the only method we use to find out about the world. We also have to… look at the world. We don’t work out what we think about the origins of the universe by sitting in an oven, thinking really hard about it.

3 could have asked the question, “does the evidence we have suggest that the earth was created mature?” but he didn’t, he asked “is it completely illogical…?” That’s because 3 doesn’t think that evidence should have a role in forming his beliefs. Sitting in that oven, with his Bible, thinking hard, is all that 3 is willing to do, because he already has his answer, and as long as it’s not “completely illogical” (just a bit illogical is OK) he’s going to stick with it.

The terror in his eyes, at the thought of being forced to do anything else, is palpable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.