Letters to the Editor

Do Fossils Tell The Truth?

Dear Bro. Don,

In “Tidings” 2/96, an interesting letter appears under this title. Perhaps the question should have been, “Do fossils contradict the divine account of life on earth?” I submit that they do not. It is the imagined age of fossils that appears to be a contradiction.

In practice, rarely can a fossil be dated by evidence in the fossil itself. Probably the nearest estimate of age is by the carbon 14 method devised by Libby and Arnold. This method produces ages of thousands of years, but is dependent on assumptions that cannot be proved. Prof. Libby is reported to have said, “The first shock that Dr. Arnold and I had was when our advisers informed us that history extended back only to 5,000 years.”

The dating method favored by evolutionists depends on dating the nearest rock to the site where the fossil has been found. As fossils are found in sedimentary rock, which cannot be dated by radio-active methods, in practice the nearest igneous rock is dated. The igneous rock is dated by the assumed evolutionary time scale. For example: Richard Leakey ‘s famous “1470” fossil of a man has been dated by various radio-active methods which gave results that varied from 220 million years to a mere 19.5 million years. Seldom do these various methods agree. In any case, these dates are of nearby rock and not of the fossil itself.

It is not widely known, but it is true that fossils are still being made where the required conditions are present. Where sedimentary rock is being formed, fossils can be made even now.

It is sad to see a brother pinning his faith on “a history of life on earth that has not been broken by any comprehensive global extinction within the past few millions of years.” The idea that the event described in Genesis 7 was merely a local flood may be due to the faulty translation of the Hebrew mabbul. This word is not used of any other event and is translated in the LXX (the Septuagint Greek Old Testament) as kataklusmos from which we get “cataclysm.” Also in the two gospel references to the event, this same Greek word is used as it is in Peter’s reference (Matt. 24:38; Luke 17:27; II Peter 2:5). Unfortunately, the word “flood” in the KJV has implied to some readers a small local event. If so, Noah and the creatures could have easily moved to a safe locality during the 120 years of warning.

As geologists know, about three quarters of the earth’s surface is covered by sedimentary rocks, even including the tops of some mountains. These sedimentary rocks are composed of material that has been eroded from elsewhere and deposited by water in their present sites. Fossils are found in sedimentary rocks. Some fossils, such as tree trunks, are known as polystrate fossils because they penetrate several strata indicating that the strata were laid in rapid succession.

Whether creation was in a succession of six days of 24 hours or of figurative days is settled by the explanation repeated six times “evening and morning.” As if there could be any doubt, Moses was to make the point clear in Exodus 20:11. It is true that the Hebrew yom is also used of a period of extended time, just as we use the word “day” both literally and figuratively. If each day was one of 1,000 years (or a million), the plant life created on day three would have had a long wait for the creation of insects to pollinate them on day six. Similarly, Adam who lived to 930 years, would have been dead before day six was completed.

Is it unreasonable to suggest that this planet was created with an appearance of age. Nobody would assume that Adam was created as a baby boy, unable to reach the fruit in the garden of Eden which was his food. Adam was created as a man, with an appearance of age. Does this mean that the Creator was a deceiver? Not for those who are prepared to accept the divine account of creation as it is recorded in scripture as Jesus did (Mk. 10:6-7).

While there are many questions that we cannot answer, there are two very clear certainties: Creation by the Almighty Creator took place on earth in six evening and morning days, and by divine decree all but Noah and those with him perished in a cataclysm.

John V. Collyer, Grimsby, UK

Evidence from Mount St. Helens

Dear Bro. Don,

As a follow-up to my previous letter, I thought readers might be interested in a few more details about the on-going research at Mount St. Helens in Washington. The relatively “small” explosion at this site (150 sq. miles of forest were leveled in six minutes!) has provided geologists with a living laboratory for research, especially on some of the issues affecting arguments over the age of the earth. This site has allowed some researchers to develop models based on catastrophic processes as opposed to processes requiring millions of years. Some of this research concerns the rapid deposition of strata. This was mentioned in my previous letter (Tid­ings, 2/96). Some other items under study are noted in the following.

An instant canyon

Erosion patterns are noted in the “mini-Grand Canyon” on the southern side of the mountain. These patterns were formed when a catastrophic slurry of mud and stones sliced through over 100 feet of fresh deposits, ancient lava flows and, in fact, bedrock. The patterns are remarkably similar to the Grand Canyon. There is even a stream running the length of this canyon which could easily give the appearance that this stream is the agent responsible for the canyon (through thousands of years of erosion).

Possibility of rapid formation of coal

Peat layers are forming on the bottom of Spirit Lake. The powerful forces released in the first explosion blew much of the surrounding forest into this lake. Of particular interest is the peat deposit accumulating on the lake bottom. This peat is from the bark of the trees some of which still float on the surface while others have sunk into the lake.

One theory of coal formation hypothesizes that much of the coal deposits in the eastern United States (and perhaps elsewhere in the world) were formed from vast deposits of peat formed from tree bark. This bark came from massive floating log mats consisting of trees ripped off the earth by titanic forces (i.e. forces associated with the Genesis flood). This peat was later buried and compressed under massive sediment deposits and/or volcanic flows. Much of the coal in the eastern states shows the very clear impressions of having been formed from tree bark. The peat/bark deposit at Mt. St. Helens has the same kind of layering seen in these coal deposits.

Layers of upright trees

Upright trees are settling to the bottom of Spirit Lake. Trees are settling upright into the lake at different levels in the peat. This is occurring primarily with the trees that have sufficiently intact root balls (allowing the heavier root end to sink). If these trees were to be buried again by another explosion at Mt. St. Helens, it is quite conceivable they could become petrified trees. If such were to be uncovered in later years, these trees, each having settled at a different depth, would give the impression of having grown in that spot, each higher layer suggesting the growth of a new forest over an earlier one. This is the kind of explanation that is currently offered for the fossil forest in Yellowstone Park (up to 27 forest ‘levels’ appear here with the suggestion that it would have taken millions of years for these levels to have been formed). Yet the processes now occurring at Mt. St. He­lens provide a far better “fit” with the observable data at Yellowstone.

A short work

As can be readily appreciated, Mt. St. Helens has provided scientists with a fascinating look at what catastrophic forces can create in a matter of days and years (and in some cases, minutes!). This living model helps to indicate what the titanic forces unleashed by the flood could have accomplished. Readers interested in this research and the help it gives in under­standing the formation of the Grand Canyon might like to get the book, “Grand Canyon, Monument to Catastrophe,” edited by Dr. Steve Austin and available from Answers in Genesis, P.O. Box 6330, Florence, KY 41022.

Ted Sleeper, San Mateo, CA

Literality of Genesis Days

Dear Bro. Don,

Bro. Alan Hayward’s letter in the February Tidings included the following statement: “As with demons, etc., the days of creation do not demand to be taken literally, as 24-hour periods…”

One of the fundamental principles in Bible study is to accept the literal rendering unless there is good reason to believe otherwise. I believe that the language in the narration describing the creation week is indeed literal, and that there is evidence to support this understanding.

Consider the events of the first creation day described in Genesis 1:3­-5.

3 “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4 “And God saw the light, that [it was] good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 “And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.”

There was a dividing of the light from the darkness to form day and night; and the sum of these, the evening and the morning, were called “the first day,” i.e. a 24-hour day. What meaning would one attach to “day,” “night,” “evening,” and “morning” if the days were other than 24-hour periods?

Further, in Exodus 20:8-11, God gave instructions concerning the sabbath day.

8 “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

9 “Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work:

10 “But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates:

11 “For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”

The sabbath enjoined upon Israel was the seventh day of a literal seven 24-hour-day period. I see no reason to believe that the sabbath of the creation week was other than the same — the seventh day of a literal seven 24-hourday period.

Tom Northcott, Dundas, ONT, Canada

We should not forget Genesis 1:1- 2: “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” Before the work of the six days commenced, heaven and earth were already in existence. We suggest that this qualifies how we should read Exodus 20:11. We feel it should be read: “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth [as now constituted]…”

Deuteronomy 29:29 should also be remembered: “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.” Whatever existed prior to the work of the six days is irrelevant to our work before God.

True, there is fascination with the past, but Paul has pertinent comments in this regard: “Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith” (I Tim. 4:4). There is much speculation about dinosaurs, fossils, rock strata, etc. which produce more questions than facts. Even if we knew the whole story it would not have the least impact on our salvation in Christ or the discipleship we are to practice.

“Day” in II Peter 3

Dear Bro. Don,

With regard to the letter from Bro. E.W. Farrar and the Exodus 20:8-11 reference to the days of creation (Tid­ings 3/96): II Peter 3 is useful in considering whether the fourth Mosaic commandment requires we take the creation account as being literal 24-hour days.

Peter speaks of a new creation (II Peter 3:13) of righteous, spiritual beings which is accomplished through God’s plan of salvation. Participants are those who respond in persistent faith to God’s command to come out from this corrupt world…

In verse 8, Peter equates a day (with the Lord) to a thousand years, suggesting the idea of a 6,000-year period for the outworking of this new creation (referenced in the editor’s response to Bro. Farrar’s letter) and the seventh millennial day of rest from wickedness.

In verses 10 and 12, Peter speaks of “the day of the Lord” and “the day of God,” respectively. These refer­ences might mean one 24-hour period in which judgment is wrought upon the world, but other prophecies suggest a sequence of events involving various armies of the nations (e.g. Zech. 12,14; Ezk. 38-39).

It is certainly possible that our omnipotent Creator could have accomplished the physical creation in six literal days, whether it be the foundation of this present epoch on an existing earth, or the creation of an entire uni­verse. An interpretation allowing for a creation in six phases of longer duration is easier to comprehend, however.

Consider the events of the sixth day in which the animal species were formed, Adam was created, he named all the creatures of the earth, and his help-mate, Eve, was derived from his rib. I do not suggest it is impossible for God to imbue Adam with extraordinary abilities to rapidly name all the species in one day. However, a reading of the account (Gen. 2:19) suggests rather that God savored this process, taking interest in Adam’s ingenuity.

We must recognize that God is not constrained by the march of time as is His physical creation. One of the joys which await successful probationers in His kingdom may be receiving the revelation of such matters. While we wait, the subject of the time of creation makes a fascinating study which defies absolute resolution with presently available knowledge.

Ian McPhee, Kitchener, ONT (Unamended)

P.S. II Peter 3:5 may hint at the heavens predating the Genesis 6-day account.

Continuous Historic View of Revelation

Dear Bro. Don,

We are hearing at some Bible schools and at other random gatherings that the continuous historical interpretation of Revelation, as given by Bro. Thomas, is incorrect and thus alternative views should be accepted.

Are we sliding into a state of liberalism which allows us to play around with the interpretation of Revelation?

We, of all people on earth, should be consistent in our understanding of Revelation!

May I heartily recommend Bro. Graham Pearce’s booklet, “The Revelation, Which Interpretation?” This exposition gives every scriptural and logical reason for believing in the continuous historical interpretation of revelation.

Gil Phillips, Lake Hughes, CA

We heartily agree. We have been greatly blessed with Bro. Thomas’ Eu­reka and are well advised to expend our efforts on amplifying his exposition rather than taking a wholly different approach. We have consistently noted two major flaws in the other approaches: they do not adequately expose and oppose the apostasy which began in the first century and has dominated ever since; second, they do not recognize the shift in biblical focus from natural Israel to the ecclesial community. In the ecclesial era, prophecy must necessarily concern events pertaining to the ecclesia in order for believers to be continuously reassured that God is still working toward the climax of His plan. Believers also need assurance that the apostasy is clearly recognized as such by the Lord lest they be discouraged at their extremely small numbers.

Having said this, various interpretations can be usefully discussed. We all agree on the essential points of Bible teaching; we should then be able to consider some of the more difficult sections of scripture, keeping the discussions biblical and devoid of rancor or ridicule.

Funds for Israel

Dear Bro. Don,

I was sorry to hear from Bro. Les Johnson in England that donations to the Jewish relief fund have dropped off since he left Israel and discontinued his newsletter. The need is still great and I feel that many, like our­selves, do not realize that we could still send donations to Bro. Johnson in England and he will see that it goes to Jewish Relief.

Bro. Johnson’s address is:

161 Rochdale Rd. East
Haywood, Lancs.
UK OL10 1QU
Jo Thomas, N. Canton, OH

Sign of Christ’s Coming in Matthew 24

Dear Bro. Don,

I feel constrained to answer the letter of Bro. Ron Kidd in the February, 1996 “Tidings.” The phrase “sign of thy coming” is a significant one as the word for “coming” is parousia and means “presence” as well as “coming” (see RV margin); i.e. to come in the sense of being physically present. For example, Paul’s bodily presence “parousia” was weak; he wasn’t visually impressive. If we see A.D. 70 as a coming of our Lord, will the coming we are looking for be physical in the sense of being seen or will it be an unseen one like A.D. 70 and as the Jehovah Witnesses believe that Christ came, but was not seen in 1914? Further, if Matthew 24:3 was fulfilled in A.D. 70, then the coming we are eagerly anticipating, e.g. I Corinthians 15:23, would be his third, not second coming.

The idea that A.D. 70 was the coming the apostles asked about is emphatically ruled out by Jesus him­self in Matthew 24:26-27. “Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: be­hold, he is in the secret chambers; be­lieve it not. For as the lightning corn­eth out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming parousia of the Son of man be.” In other words, “If I’m not here physically and plainly visible, don’t believe it however plausible and convincing their argument.” This warning ends Jesus’ depiction of events leading up to, and including, the calamities of A.D. 70 ending at v. 27.

Verses 28-31 describe the rebirth of Israel as a spiritual carcass. It would be a time of great upheaval leading to Israel’s eclipse — the sun darkened by the Gogian invasion, v. 29. We suggest the “sign of the Son of man in heaven” is Jesus coming in glory with the angels to save Israel. (See Matthew 25:31, and see also Isaiah 49:22-26, where the standard or ensign, is Jesus; notice v. 25, also Isaiah 62:10-12). Upon recognizing their Savior, the “tribes of the earth mourn,” which is a direct quote from Zechariah 12:6-14, where Israel mourns the one they pierced after he has helped them destroy their enemies.

Matthew 24:30 ends with the assurance Jesus will be plainly seen at this time. In verse 30 we have the sound of the trumpet which heralds the resur­rection, I Corinthians 15:52, “…at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised…” Also I Thessalonians 4:16, “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first.”

These events are in the immediate context of the parable of the fig tree which, in this place, can only be Israel. The soft and tender branch is her revival after some 1,900 years of being shriveled up. Soft and tender would hardly describe the Lord in glory after his resurrection. Also, the word for branch is the same word Paul uses to describe the olive tree in Romans 11:15-24, which also represents Israel being grafted back into its old root.

Paul, who spent some time with the Lord Jesus in Arabia and was instructed in these things by him there, was quick to warn the Thessalonians that the coming (parousia) of the Lord was not for them (A.D. 50-60) an immediate prospect (II Thess. 2:1-2).

He went on to tell them an apostasy was to develop out of themselves over a protracted period which the Lord would finally destroy by the brightness of his coming (parousia) (II Thess. 2:8). We still have that apostate system with us today. The coming (parousia) of our Lord Jesus is a specific time in history when 1) Jesus will physically return to this earth, 2) Israel will be delivered and return to God in truth, 3) the saints will receive their reward after judgment and 4) the apostasy will be destroyed.

None of these events have happened as yet so A.D. 70 could not have been the coming, or even a coming (parousia) of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Jim Scott, Dundalk, ONT

Regarding the sequence of events proposed by Bro. Scott, we would suggest that items 2) and 3) should be reversed. We feel the deliverance of Israel is part of God’s execution of “vengeance upon the heathen, and punishments upon the people” (Psa. 149:7). This vengeance will be carried out by Christ and the immortalized faithful (Psa. 149:9; Rev. 2:26­28) which would require that the deliverance of Israel be preceded by the resurrection and judgment. Zechariah 14:5 confirms such a sequence, for Is­rael is delivered when “the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.”

Why Is Our History Relevant?

Dear Bro. Don,

Why is it relevant for us to know anything about our 150-plus-year his­tory? How, if you knew all the facts about our early pioneers, could that information be of any increase in one’s understanding of revealed Truth? Would this history be of any value at the judgment seat?

…What is wrong with paying attention to the command of Christ to “search the scriptures…” (John 5:39)? Are not Luke’s comments in Acts 17:11 food for thought? (“They searched the scriptures daily”)…

J.K. Levittown, PA

We agree that our emphasis should be direct study of scripture. Over the years, the Tidings has reflected this opinion in that most articles are directing attention to the word of God. The recent series by Bro. Hemin gray is an exception to the norm and grateful response from several readers indicates that it is being appreciated.

There are many valuable points arising from Bro. Peter’s study. This month, for example, attention is drawn to the interecclesial fellowship practices of various Campbellite churches with which Bro. Thomas was working and from which came the first Chris­tadelphian ecclesias. At that time, their practices were similar to ours and no doubt reinforced Bro. Thomas’ aversion to a highly organized denominational structure — an aversion which should still be reflected in our thinking. As has been noted, those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Brother in Need of Assistance

Dear Bro. Don,

I have been out of work for several years and have been unable to obtain work. My situation has become serious for these reasons:

• * Being forced to move because of eminent domain with the last day in my house being September 30, 1996.
• * No work in the area.
• * Need of special accommodations.

I am looking for work outside of California in other states or will consider being sponsored in Canada if a brother is willing to do so.

Education: B.S. in Chemical Engineering and M.S. in Engineering.

Experience: Four years of industrial experience related to engineering; two years with the Bechtel Corporation, two years with a research company; warehouse supervisor for a large office supply company. I also have experience in electrical, plumbing, wood working both rough and fine, mechanical and some machine work.

Any brother or sister who is willing to help or would like a resume, please contact:

Bro. Michael E. Davis
700 East Wells St.
San Gabriel, CA 91776-3512
(818)280-9470