The CreationProcessAge Discussion on Creationism
(Introduction & Table Of Contents)
Would a wise man answer with empty notions
or fill his belly with the hot east wind?
Would he argue with useless words,
with speeches that have no value?
But you even undermine piety
and hinder devotion to God.
Your sin prompts your mouth;
you adopt the tongue of the crafty.
Your own mouth condemns you, not mine;
your own lips testify against you.
Are you the first man ever born?
Were you brought forth before the hills?
Do you listen in on God's council?
Do you limit wisdom to yourself?
What do you know that we do not know?
What insights do you have that we do not have?
    — Job 15:2-9 [NIV]
As you do not know the path of the wind,
or how the body is formed in a mother's womb,
so you cannot understand the work of God,
the Maker of all things.
    — Ecclesiastes 11:5
The heart of the discerning acquires knowledge;
the ears of the wise seek it out.
    — Proverbs 18:15
The man of integrity walks securely,
but he who takes crooked paths will be found out.
    — Proverbs 10:9
A truthful witness gives honest testimony,
but a false witness tells lies.
    — Proverbs 12:17
How long will you simple ones love your simple ways?
How long will mockers delight in mockery and fools hate knowledge?
    — Proverbs 1:22
If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.
    — Matthew 15:14
Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
    — John 3:20
Someone might argue, "If my falsehood enhances God's truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?" Why not say — as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say — "Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved.
    — Romans 3:7-8
...command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work — which is by faith. The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Some have wandered away from these and turned to meaningless talk. They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.
    — 1 Timothy 1:3b-7
But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him. You may be sure that such a man is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.
    — Titus 3:9-11
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
    — 2 Timothy 4:3-4
I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.
    — Romans 16:17-18
In the summer and autumn of the year 2000, I started getting emails that were part of a discussion on what was called the "Open Letter" (http://www.watchmanmag.com/0306/030613.htm), which was cooked up by a contingent of young earth creationists in the Church Of Christ (COC) who are what I call "exclusivists," meaning that they work by internal church politics to ostracise, or get other COC members to "withdraw fellowship" from, anyone in the COC who would dare to reject the young earth creationism creed. I had been added to an already existing email distribution list. Since the general topic of young earth creationism is of interest to me, naturally I joined in the discussion. Interestingly enough, all of the "Open Letter" advocates, except for only one (Marc Gibson), quickly dropped out of the discussion.

There was also another young earth creationist who participated in this discussion, Roderick Bernitt, who was not party to the "Open Letter" and who is not an "exclusivist" about young earth creationism — in other words, he believes that a person could sincerely disagree with the doctrine of young earth creationism and still be a good Christian in good standing with God.

After several days of my being on the original email distribution list, I moved the distribution list to an online discussion forum to simplify and improve the address list management. The posts to this discussion were originally archived at the website of this online discussion forum that I set up for it. However, after a time, that service (a free one) closed the archive down after a period of inactivity, so I re-established the archive of the discussion here on my website (posts with a green background). When I did this, I also added back into it some of the posts I had made to the initial distribution list before setting up the online discussion forum (posts with a blue background). I especially want you to see the sheer prejudicial antagonism expressed by Stan Cox.

With Roderick Bernitt, you see some interesting discussion about the astronomical details. One thing Rod liked to focus on (while pretending he didn't really advocate it) was Barry Setterfield's discredited lightspeed decay idea.

But Rod is not a member of the Church Of Christ, and I know that that may be of some importance to some of you who read this. For you, I want you just to observe for yourself how these self-appointed guardians of proper religious doctrine Daniel King, Sr., Harry Osborne, Stan Cox, Dudley Spears, and the like simply cannot stand for genuine discussion of their ideas, because these men who pretend to know so much — who are so sure of themselves that they advocate the ostracism of all Christians who dare to disagree with them about young earth creationism — are really quite ignorant of the relevant subject matter. Don't take my word for it! Just read their discussion. Not only are they ignorant of what they preach against so intolerantly, but they demonstrate their failure to understand even basic details that are explicitly pointed out to them. (Of course, since they wilfully and purposely run away from digging into relevant details that demonstrate the fallacies of their thinking, this should not be considered any big surprise! They run away from the details because they know that their false ideas cannot stand the light of day.)

Now don't get me wrong! I'm not about to claim that these men are dull and stupid. Not at all. What you see with them is an example of how deep-seated prejudice seriously distorts the ability to reason correctly. They have allowed themselves to become so enamored of this idol of this religious creed, that it has crippled their perception even of common sense. (For a particularly obvious example of this, see my "Re: Facts Vs. Theory" and "Still Lamenting Exclusivist Politics and Head-Burying" in response to the comments of Dudley Ross Spears. Dudley is clearly an intelligent guy, but his young earth creationist belief has absolutely blinded him against acknowledging even straightforward points of logic.) With prejudice this deep, of course, against acknowledging even the most obvious and indisputable points, it is no wonder that young earth creationists such as these men, who hypocritically call themselves "preachers of truth," demonstrate such a lack of comprehension of more detailed information.

Incidentally, knowing that these guys in their prejudice just love to engage in barn floors full of, well, you know — let's just politely call it "bluster" — let it be known that besides the straightforward fact that these advocates of young earth creationists really just don't know what they're talking about, all while they call for discussion and then run away from it, I have a standing challenge to meet any of the "Open Letter" authors or signers in any open forum, public or private, for written or spoken discussion or formal debate on the subject of young earth creationism. The pages of my website are open to them. They can write anything about the subject of creationism they wish to write, and then by digging into the details we shall continue to prove that their position is false because the facts about the world have already falsified it. I will meet them in any written forum open for discussion and demonstrate why their position is false. I will meet them in any open forum for public discussion, whether it be a hotel meeting room, college class room, or church auditorium. The home page of this website has carried a debate challenge on it almost since its inception, and none of these "Open Letter" advocates has taken up the challenge.

            — Todd S. Greene   (7/22/01)

[8/22/01 Note]

Normally, I wouldn't do this. (Indeed, I have a collection of many emails in the past that are also like this.) But I want you to see for yourself the sheer antagonism of these people who don't know what they're talking about and who also obstinately refuse to tolerate or listen to any criticism of their false beliefs. I've been sending out email announcements about this CPA archive having been set up, and I have sent this announcement to the authors and some of the co-signers of the "Open Letter." Larry Fain, one of these "Open Letter" co-signers, chose to openly express his personal, emotional antagonism toward someone who dares to point out the fallacies of his YEC belief. Notice the completely irrational irrelevance of his remarks, and that he expresses no interest whatsoever toward any possible consideration of the details that show that the position he signed on to is wrong. Do these guys who pretend to respect truth, really respect truth? With attitudes like those demonstrated by Larry, I think the rest of us understand the reality of the situation. These guys love to dish out the prejudicial rhetoric, but, oh, how they hate to be called on using such prejudice. Please take a look for yourself, and be sure to read the last sentence of Larry's last email to me:
[ Correspondence with Larry H. Fain ]


The CreationProcessAge Discussion on Creationism
Table Of Contents

(all posts, Parts 1-19)
Post #SubjectAuthorDate
emailLamenting Exclusivist Politics and Head-BuryingTodd S. Greene8/8/00
emailRe: Facts Vs. TheoryTodd S. Greene8/14/00
emailRe: Lamenting Exclusivist Politics and Head-BuryingTodd S. Greene8/14/00
emailStill Lamenting Exclusivist Politics and Head-BuryingTodd S. Greene8/15/00
emailExploring the Possibility of a DiscussionTodd S. Greene8/15/00
emailRe: Exploring the Possibility of a DiscussionTodd S. Greene8/18/00
emailRe: Facts Vs. TheoryTodd S. Greene8/22/00
emailRe: Facts Vs. TheoryTodd S. Greene8/22/00
1Distance Estimation and Cepheid magnitudesTodd S. Greene8/28/00
2Re: Distance Estimation and Cepheid magnitudesRoderick Bernitt8/28/00
3Re: Distance Estimation and Cepheid magnitudesTodd S. Greene8/28/00
4Re: Distance Estimation and Cepheid magnitudesRoderick Bernitt8/28/00
5Re: Velocity of lightRoderick Bernitt8/28/00
6Re: Velocity of lightRoderick Bernitt8/28/00
7Tech Note to all membersTodd S. Greene8/28/00
8FW: Velocity of lightRoderick Bernitt8/28/00
9Velocity of LightTracy P. Hamilton8/28/00
10Re: Velocity of lightTodd S. Greene8/28/00
11Re: Velocity of LightChristopher Sharp8/29/00
12The Age of the Earth & The Age of the SkyDavid Mathews8/29/00
13Re: Velocity of LightRoderick Bernitt8/29/00
14Re: Velocity of lightRoderick Bernitt8/29/00
15Re: The Age of the Earth & The Age of the SkyTodd S. Greene8/29/00
16Re: Velocity of LightRoderick Bernitt8/29/00
17Is Prejudice More Important Than Truth?Todd S. Greene8/29/00
18Anthropomorphic Language In The BibleTodd S. Greene8/29/00
19Re: Velocity of LightTom Couchman8/29/00
20Re: Velocity of LightRoderick Bernitt8/29/00
21Re: Velocity of LightTodd S. Greene8/29/00
22Re: Velocity of LightTodd S. Greene8/29/00
23Re: Velocity of LightRoderick Bernitt8/29/00
24Re: Velocity of LightRoderick Bernitt8/29/00
25Re: Velocity of LightTom Couchman8/29/00
26Open Letter Addressed to Harry OsborneDavid Mathews8/30/00
27The Age of the Earth: A Vital Issue?David Mathews8/30/00
28Re: The Age of the Earth: A Vital Issue?Todd S. Greene8/30/00
29Re: The Age of the Earth: A Vital Issue?David Mathews8/30/00
30About South LivingstonDavid Mathews8/30/00
31is the big bang religion?Roderick Bernitt8/30/00
32Re: Velocity of LightTodd S. Greene8/30/00
33Re: Velocity of LightTom Couchman8/30/00
34The Speed of Light: What do Recent Experimental RRoderick Bernitt8/30/00
35Addressed to RodDavid Mathews8/30/00
36Re: Addressed to RodRoderick Bernitt8/30/00
37Re: Addressed to RodDavid Mathews8/30/00
38Re: Addressed to David MathewsRoderick Bernitt8/31/00
39Re: Addressed to David MathewsRoderick Bernitt8/31/00
40Re: Addressed to David MathewsDavid Mathews9/1/00
41Re: Addressed to David MathewsMarc Gibson9/1/00
42Re: Addressed to David MathewsTodd S. Greene9/1/00
43Re: Addressed to David MathewsMarc Gibson9/1/00
44some data from geology and astronomyRoderick Bernitt9/5/00
45(no subject)Tracy P. Hamilton9/5/00
46Re: Addressed to David MathewsDavid Mathews9/6/00
47Good AnswerDavid Mathews9/6/00
48Re: Addressed to David MathewsTodd S. Greene9/6/00
49Re: Addressed to David MathewsTom Couchman9/6/00
50Re: Addressed to David MathewsMarc Gibson9/6/00
51Re: Addressed to David MathewsTodd S. Greene9/6/00
52some notes on geology from RodRoderick Bernitt9/7/00
53Re: Addressed to David MathewsMarc Gibson9/7/00
54Uniformitarian assumptionsTom Couchman9/7/00
55Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsRoderick Bernitt9/7/00
56Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsTom Couchman9/7/00
57Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsRoderick Bernitt9/7/00
58Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsRoderick Bernitt9/7/00
59Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsRoderick Bernitt9/7/00
60Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsMarc Gibson9/7/00
61Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsTracy P. Hamilton9/7/00
62Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsTom Couchman9/7/00
63Re: Addressed to David MathewsTracy P. Hamilton9/7/00
64Re: some notes on geology from RodTracy P. Hamilton9/7/00
65Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsRoderick Bernitt9/8/00
66Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsTodd S. Greene9/8/00
67To Marc, re Psalm 33Tom Couchman9/8/00
68To Marc, re the relationship of science and scripTom Couchman9/8/00
69Green River varves and formation rate questionRoderick Bernitt9/8/00
70Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsTracy P. Hamilton9/8/00
71Marc, re uniformitarian assumptionsTom Couchman9/8/00
72Re: Uniformitarian assumptionsRoderick Bernitt9/8/00
73Re: Green River varves and formation rate questioTracy P. Hamilton9/8/00
74Re: Green River varves and formation rate qu estiRoderick Bernitt9/8/00
75Re: Green River varves and formation rate qu estiRoderick Bernitt9/8/00
76Re: Green River varves and formation rate qu estiTom Couchman9/8/00
77Re: Green River varves and formation rate qu estiRoderick Bernitt9/8/00
78SN1987A and the Antiquity of the UniverseTodd S. Greene9/8/00
79Re: Green River varves and formation rate qu estiTracy P. Hamilton9/8/00
80Re: Green River varves and formation rate qu estiTracy P. Hamilton9/8/00
81Is the "Call For Discussion" Genuine?Todd S. Greene9/9/00
82Re: Is the "Call For Discussion" Genuine?Marc Gibson9/9/00
emailRe: Carnal TacticsTodd S. Greene9/10/00
emailRe: Yes, "Let's be clear!"Todd S. Greene9/10/00
emailThe Devil Is In The DetailsTodd S. Greene9/11/00
83Green River woesRoderick Bernitt9/11/00
84Re: Green River woesTracy P. Hamilton9/11/00
85Re: Green River woesRoderick Bernitt9/11/00
86some possible fun for allRoderick Bernitt9/11/00
87Christopher's and Marc's CommentsTodd S. Greene9/11/00
88Planet FormationTodd S. Greene9/12/00
89Re: some possible fun for allTodd S. Greene9/12/00
90Re: some possible fun for allChristopher Sharp9/12/00
91Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
92Re: some possible fun for all - for Todd GreeneRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
93Re: Planet FormationTodd S. Greene9/12/00
94Re: some possible fun for allTodd S. Greene9/12/00
95Re: some possible fun for allRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
96Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
97Re: Green River woesTracy P. Hamilton9/12/00
98Re: Green River woesRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
99Re: Planet FormationChristopher Sharp9/12/00
100Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
101Re: some possible fun for allTodd S. Greene9/12/00
102FW: [CreationProcessAge] Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
103Re: some possible fun for allRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
104Re: Planet FormationTodd S. Greene9/12/00
105Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
106Re: some possible fun for allTodd S. Greene9/12/00
107Re: some possible fun for allRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
108Re: Planet FormationTodd S. Greene9/12/00
109Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
110Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
111Re: some possible fun for allTodd S. Greene9/12/00
112Re: Planet FormationTodd S. Greene9/12/00
113Re: some possible fun for allRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
114Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
115Re: Planet FormationTodd S. Greene9/12/00
116Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
117Re: Green River woesTracy P. Hamilton9/12/00
118Re: some possible fun for allRoderick Bernitt9/12/00
119Planet FormationRon Halbrook9/12/00
120Re: some possible fun for allTracy P. Hamilton9/12/00
121SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTodd S. Greene9/13/00
122cosmology wrapupRoderick Bernitt9/13/00
123Re: SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTodd S. Greene9/13/00
124Re: SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/13/00
125Re: SN1987A Directly Disproves YECChristopher Sharp9/13/00
126Re: cosmology wrapupTom Couchman9/13/00
127Re: cosmology wrapupRoderick Bernitt9/13/00
128Re: Planet FormationChristopher Sharp9/14/00
129Re: Planet FormationRoderick Bernitt9/14/00
130The Pots Call the Kettles BlackTodd S. Greene9/14/00
131Re: The Pots Call the Kettles BlackRoderick Bernitt9/14/00
132Re: The Pots Call the Kettles BlackTodd S. Greene9/14/00
133Re: The Pots Call the Kettles BlackRoderick Bernitt9/14/00
134FW: The age of the jovian planets CEN TJ 14(1):3-Roderick Bernitt9/14/00
135Re: FW: The age of the jovian planets CEN TJ 14(1Christopher Sharp9/14/00
136Re: FW: The age of the jovian planets CE N TJ 14(Roderick Bernitt9/14/00
137some Jovian notesRoderick Bernitt9/14/00
138Re: FW: The age of the jovian planets CE N TJ 14(Christopher Sharp9/15/00
139Truth Cannot Contradict TruthTodd S. Greene9/15/00
140some more info on JupiterRoderick Bernitt9/15/00
141Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthRoderick Bernitt9/15/00
142Solving the Intolerance ProblemDavid Mathews9/15/00
143Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthTom Couchman9/15/00
144Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthRoderick Bernitt9/15/00
145Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthTom Couchman9/15/00
146Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthRoderick Bernitt9/15/00
147Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthTom Couchman9/15/00
148Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthRoderick Bernitt9/15/00
149Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthTom Couchman9/15/00
150Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthRoderick Bernitt9/15/00
151Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthChristopher Sharp9/15/00
152Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthTodd S. Greene9/15/00
153Re: Truth Cannot Contradict TruthTom Couchman9/15/00
154Re: some more info on JupiterChristopher Sharp9/15/00
155Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Roderick Bernitt9/15/00
156Thoughts to PonderMarc Gibson9/15/00
157Re: Thoughts to PonderTracy P. Hamilton9/15/00
158Re: Thoughts to PonderTodd S. Greene9/15/00
159Genesis 1:14-19 and Job 38:7Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
160SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
161Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tom Couchman9/18/00
162Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
163Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tom Couchman9/18/00
164Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
165Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tom Couchman9/18/00
166Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
167Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tom Couchman9/18/00
168Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
169Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tom Couchman9/18/00
170Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
171Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tom Couchman9/18/00
172Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
173Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tracy P. Hamilton9/18/00
174Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tracy P. Hamilton9/18/00
175Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tracy P. Hamilton9/18/00
176Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
177Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tom Couchman9/18/00
178Re: SN 1987A-certain?Christopher Sharp9/18/00
179Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
180weak case for unchanging constantsRoderick Bernitt9/18/00
181Re: SN 1987A-certain?Roderick Bernitt9/18/00
182Re: weak case for unchanging constantsTom Couchman9/18/00
183Re: weak case for unchanging constantsRoderick Bernitt9/18/00
184Re: SN 1987A-certain?Christopher Sharp9/18/00
185Re: Thoughts to PonderMarc Gibson9/18/00
186Re: Thoughts to PonderChristopher Sharp9/18/00
187Re: Thoughts to PonderMarc Gibson9/18/00
188Re: Thoughts to PonderChristopher Sharp9/19/00
189Re: SN 1987A-certain?Christopher Sharp9/19/00
190Re: Thoughts to PonderTodd S. Greene9/19/00
191Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTodd S. Greene9/19/00
192FW: the new cantorRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
193For Marc and Rod: A proposal for discussion of rTom Couchman9/19/00
194Re: For Marc and Rod: A proposal for discus sionRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
195Re: Thoughts to PonderTracy P. Hamilton9/19/00
196Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
197Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTracy P. Hamilton9/19/00
198Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tracy P. Hamilton9/19/00
199OEC and light-transit-timeRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
200Re: SN 1987A-certain?Tracy P. Hamilton9/19/00
201Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
202Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECChristopher Sharp9/19/00
203Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTom Couchman9/19/00
204Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
205Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECChristopher Sharp9/19/00
206Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
207Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
208Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTom Couchman9/19/00
209Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
210for Tom CouchmanRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
211Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTom Couchman9/19/00
212Re: for Tom CouchmanTom Couchman9/19/00
213Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
214Re: for Tom CouchmanRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
215Re: Thoughts to PonderMarc Gibson9/19/00
216Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTom Couchman9/19/00
217Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
218Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTom Couchman9/19/00
219Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/19/00
220Re: Thoughts to PonderMarc Gibson9/19/00
221Re: For Marc and Rod: A proposal for discussionMarc Gibson9/19/00
222Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECChristopher Sharp9/19/00
223Re: Thoughts to PonderChristopher Sharp9/19/00
224Re: Thoughts to PonderTracy P. Hamilton9/19/00
225Re: Thoughts to PonderMarc Gibson9/19/00
226Re: for Tom CouchmanTracy P. Hamilton9/19/00
227Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTracy P. Hamilton9/19/00
228Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTracy P. Hamilton9/19/00
229Re: Thoughts to PonderChristopher Sharp9/19/00
230Re: for Tom CouchmanChristopher Sharp9/20/00
231Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
232Re: for Tom CouchmanTracy P. Hamilton9/20/00
233for Tom Couchman-Hosea 6:2Roderick Bernitt9/20/00
234Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTracy P. Hamilton9/20/00
235Re: Thoughts to PonderTracy P. Hamilton9/20/00
236Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
237Re: Thoughts to PonderMarc Gibson9/20/00
238Various Points of ScriptureTom Couchman9/20/00
239Re: Various Points of ScriptureRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
240Re: Various Points of ScriptureTom Couchman9/20/00
241Re: Various Points of ScriptureRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
242Re: Various Points of ScriptureRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
243Re: Various Points of ScriptureTracy P. Hamilton9/20/00
244Re: Various Points of ScriptureTom Couchman9/20/00
245Re: Various Points of ScriptureRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
246Re: Various Points of ScriptureTracy P. Hamilton9/20/00
247Re: Various Points of ScriptureRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
248Re: for Tom Couchman-Hosea 6:2Christopher Sharp9/20/00
249Re: for Tom Couchman-Hosea 6:2Roderick Bernitt9/20/00
250Re: Various Points of ScriptureTom Couchman9/20/00
251Re: Various Points of ScriptureRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
252Re: Various Points of ScriptureTom Couchman9/20/00
253Re: Thoughts to PonderTracy P. Hamilton9/20/00
254Re: Various Points of ScriptureRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
255Radiometric DatingTodd S. Greene9/20/00
256pulsar spin rates vs. cDKRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
257Re: Radiometric DatingRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
258Re: Radiometric DatingRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
259Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKChristopher Sharp9/20/00
260Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKRoderick Bernitt9/20/00
261Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKTom Couchman9/20/00
262Re: Various Points of ScriptureTom Couchman9/20/00
263Re: Various Points of ScriptureTracy P. Hamilton9/20/00
264Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKChristopher Sharp9/20/00
265Re: Radiometric DatingTracy P. Hamilton9/20/00
266Re: some Jovian notesChristopher Sharp9/20/00
267Re: Various Points of ScriptureMarc Gibson9/21/00
268Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
269Re: Various Points of ScriptureRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
270Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
271Re: some Jovian notesRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
272Re: Radiometric DatingRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
273FW: The age of the jovian planets CEN TJ 14(1):3-Roderick Bernitt9/21/00
274Re: Radiometric DatingTracy P. Hamilton9/21/00
275Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKChristopher Sharp9/21/00
276Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
277Re: pulsar spin rates vs. cDKChristopher Sharp9/21/00
278Newborn Star Squirts a BubbleRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
279Re: Newborn Star Squirts a BubbleChristopher Sharp9/21/00
280Re: Newborn Star Squirts a BubbleRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
281Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTodd S. Greene9/21/00
282Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
283Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTom Couchman9/21/00
284Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
285Re: Radiometric DatingTodd S. Greene9/21/00
286Re: Radiometric DatingRoderick Bernitt9/21/00
287Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTodd S. Greene9/21/00
288Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTracy P. Hamilton9/21/00
289Re: Radiometric DatingTracy P. Hamilton9/21/00
290Re: Newborn Star Squirts a BubbleChristopher Sharp9/21/00
291Apparent vs. Actual AgeDavid Mathews9/22/00
292Re: Radiometric DatingTodd S. Greene9/22/00
293The Metaphorical Language Of CreationTodd S. Greene9/22/00
294Re: Apparent vs. Actual AgeTodd S. Greene9/22/00
295star formation theoryRoderick Bernitt9/22/00
296Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTodd S. Greene9/22/00
297Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/22/00
298Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECTodd S. Greene9/22/00
299Re: Yes, SN1987A Directly Disproves YECRoderick Bernitt9/22/00
300The stars were there when the earth was createdTom Couchman9/22/00
301For Marc: A Question about Instantaneous MiracleTom Couchman9/22/00
302FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Roderick Bernitt9/22/00
303Marriage, "In the Beginning," and a question forTom Couchman9/22/00
304Re: FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Tom Couchman9/22/00
305Re: FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Tracy P. Hamilton9/22/00
306Re: FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Roderick Bernitt9/22/00
307Re: FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Roderick Bernitt9/22/00
308Re: FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Roderick Bernitt9/22/00
309Re: FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Todd S. Greene9/22/00
310Re: FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Todd S. Greene9/22/00
311Re: FW: Genesis 1:14-19 and Job chapter 38Roderick Bernitt9/22/00
312Re: The Metaphorical Language Of CreationMarc Gibson9/23/00
313Re: For Marc: A Question about Instantaneous MirMarc Gibson9/23/00
314Re: Marriage, "In the Beginning," and a questionMarc Gibson9/23/00
315Re: The Metaphorical Language Of CreationMarc Gibson9/23/00
316Re: For Marc: A Question about Instantaneous MirMarc Gibson9/23/00
317Re: The Metaphorical Language Of CreationMarc Gibson9/25/00
318Re: For Marc: A Question about Instantaneous MirMarc Gibson9/25/00
319Genesis chapter 1 and disinformationRoderick Bernitt9/25/00
320Marc: Exposition of Hebrews 4Tom Couchman9/26/00
321Instantaneous miraclesTom Couchman9/26/00
322For Rod: Poetic structure in Genesis 1Tom Couchman9/26/00
323Re: Marc: Exposition of Hebrews 4Roderick Bernitt9/26/00
324Use of the "Waw Consecutive" to designate uninterTom Couchman9/26/00
325Re: Instantaneous miraclesTodd S. Greene9/26/00
326Re: For Rod: Poetic structure in Genesis 1Todd S. Greene9/26/00
327Re: Marc: Exposition of Hebrews 4Todd S. Greene9/26/00
328Re: Use of the "Waw Consecutive" to designat e unRoderick Bernitt9/26/00
329Re: For Rod: Poetic structure in Genesi s 1Roderick Bernitt9/26/00
330Re: For Rod: Poetic structure in Genesi s 1Roderick Bernitt9/26/00
331Re: Instantaneous miraclesMarc Gibson9/26/00
332Re: Instantaneous miraclesRoderick Bernitt9/26/00
333Re: Marc: Exposition of Hebrews 4Marc Gibson9/26/00
334Re: Instantaneous miraclesMarc Gibson9/26/00
335Re: Marc: Exposition of Hebrews 4Marc Gibson9/26/00
336Re: Instantaneous miraclesTom Couchman9/26/00
337Re: Marc: Exposition of Hebrews 4Todd S. Greene9/27/00
338Genesis 1-11 and Hebrew grammarRoderick Bernitt9/27/00
339Re: Genesis 1-11 and Hebrew grammarTom Couchman9/27/00
340Re: Genesis 1-11 and Hebrew grammarRoderick Bernitt9/27/00
341Re: Marc: Exposition of Hebrews 4Tom Couchman9/27/00
342Re: Genesis 1-11 and Hebrew grammarTodd S. Greene9/27/00
343Re: Genesis 1-11 and Hebrew grammarRoderick Bernitt9/27/00
344The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayTodd S. Greene9/28/00
345Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayRoderick Bernitt9/28/00
346Genesis 1Tom Couchman9/29/00
347The Shadow of the SabbathTom Couchman9/29/00
348Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayTodd S. Greene9/29/00
349The Ghost of GalileoTom Couchman9/29/00
350Re: Genesis 1Roderick Bernitt9/29/00
351Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayRoderick Bernitt9/29/00
352Re: The Ghost of GalileoRoderick Bernitt9/29/00
353Re: The Ghost of GalileoTom Couchman9/29/00
354Re: The Ghost of GalileoRoderick Bernitt9/29/00
355Re: The Ghost of GalileoTom Couchman9/29/00
356Re: The Ghost of GalileoRoderick Bernitt9/29/00
357Re: The Ghost of GalileoTom Couchman9/29/00
358Re: The Ghost of GalileoRoderick Bernitt9/29/00
359Re: Instantaneous miraclesMarc Gibson9/29/00
360Re: The Ghost of GalileoTom Couchman9/29/00
361Re: The Ghost of GalileoRoderick Bernitt9/29/00
362Re: Marc: Exposition of Hebrews 4Marc Gibson9/29/00
363Re: Instantaneous miraclesTom Couchman9/29/00
364Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayTodd S. Greene9/29/00
365Re: Genesis 1Todd S. Greene9/29/00
366Re: The Ghost of GalileoTodd S. Greene9/29/00
367Re: Instantaneous miraclesTodd S. Greene9/30/00
368Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayRoderick Bernitt10/2/00
369Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayTodd S. Greene10/3/00
370Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayRoderick Bernitt10/3/00
371Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayTracy P. Hamilton10/3/00
372Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayTodd S. Greene10/4/00
373Re: The Fallacy of Lightspeed DecayTodd S. Greene10/4/00
374Hebrews 4 and related issuesTom Couchman10/6/00
  A Little Correspondence With Larry H. Fain
From: Todd S. Greene
To: Larry H. Fain
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:41 PM
Subject: Archive of discussion of "Open Letter" to Florida College


Hi, Larry Fain.

I'm informing you of this, just as I'm informing several other people.
To make it easy for me, I'm simply copying to you the announcement I'm
sending out. If you wish to disregard this email, please do so.

Regards,
Todd S. Greene

=======================================================================

I'm writing to you simply to inform you that I have just updated my
website with the complete archive of what was called the
CreationProcessAge discussion forum (which was recently removed from
Yahoo Groups). This discussion was directly prompted by "An Open Letter:
The Creation Account & Florida College" (see:
http://www.watchmanmag.com/0306/030613.htm ) and in this discussion we
showed the error of every major premise of the "Open Letter" group.

These discussions and the information contained in them are
directly relevant to Church Of Christ members. On my website are also
two other archives of discussions with YECs in the Church Of Christ, one
with the "Let Us Reason" group (Gil Yoder, Ron Cosby, Marion Fox,
Darrell Broking, and so on) and one with the Mars List group (David
Arnold and Steve Willis). In all of these discussions, the errors of
young earth creationism are clearly pointed out.

Here is the URL:

   » The YEC Discussion in the LUR ("Let Us Reason") Forum
   » The YEC Discussion in the CreationProcessAge Forum (archive)
   » The YEC Discussion in the Mars-List Forum

Anyone who wishes to discuss any specific issues regarding the subject
of creationism is, as always, welcome and invited to discuss them at:

   "Creationism" Discussion Group
From: Larry H. Fain
To: Todd S. Greene
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 9:29 AM
Subject: RE: Archive of discussion of "Open Letter" to Florida College


God will judge every error of men and your denial of the truth about
creation will cost you your soul.

I dont know who you are, but as an enemy of the cross, my only concern is
that you will perish. I, like God, desire that no man perish but that all
should come to repentance.

You have not nor can you show ANY error concerning the "young earth
creationism" position as it is from God.

May God have mercy on your soul

LHF
From: Todd S. Greene
To: Larry H. Fain
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: Archive of discussion of "Open Letter" to Florida College


Hi, Larry.

God will also judge those who preach error who obstinately refuse to
acknowledge and correct their error after having their error pointed
out to them clearly, directly, and unequivocally. Those who preach and
teach that the universe and the earth have not existed for more 6,000
years (or even, say, 10,000 years) are preaching and teaching what is
factually wrong about the world that we live in. Christians who teach
what is factually wrong and who obstinately refuse to accept any
correction whatsoever are Christians who are actively engaged in
sinful practice.

I am not an enemy of the cross. I *am* an enemy of those tho preach
and teach what is factually wrong about the world and who are very
obstinate in maintaining their error.

People who call themselves Christians have the responsibility to live
up to their own Christian standards of responsibility regarding honesty
and intellectual integrity. As a young earth creationist, you aren't
doing this. Even worse, you spend time and effort to attack people like
Hill Roberts who show that they *are* trying to live up to such
Christian standards. Thus, you demonstrate what can only be called
hypocrisy.

May your God have mercy on your soul.

The errors in the young earth creationism creed have been shown time
and time again, and the specific flaws in the "Open Letter" that you
signed have been described in detail in the discussion that is archived
on my website. Please ignore the flaws in your young earth creationism
creed, as I know you desire to do. This is precisely the way that young
earth creationists behave, so I don't expect anything different from
you.

Again, should you actually want to discuss the details of your
position, you are welcome and invited to do so at the discussion forum

   "Creationism" Discussion Group

Sincerely,
Todd S. Greene
From: Larry H. Fain
To: Todd S. Greene
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2001 3:01 PM
Subject: RE: Archive of discussion of "Open Letter" to Florida College


Get a life

It is the only one you are likely to have
From: Todd S. Greene
To: Larry H. Fain
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: Archive of discussion of "Open Letter" to Florida College


Hi, Larry.

I agree with you. This is exactly what I tell all of my young earth
creationist friends: "Get a life, man! The sun does not revolve around
the earth, no matter how much you don't like that fact. Grow up
already!"

Again, Larry, anytime you want to actually discuss the substantive
details of the subject, you are welcome and invited to do so at:

   "Creationism" Discussion Group

I also have a standing challenge to debate young earth creationists on
this subject. See my home page

   Greene's Creationism Truth Filter

where this challenge is issued. I also repeat the challenge on the
CreationProcessAge page that I originally told you about, at

   The CreationProcessAge Discussion on Creationism

On that page I have written:

     I have a standing challenge to meet any of the "Open Letter"
     authors or signers in any open forum, public or private, for
     written or spoken discussion or formal debate on the subject
     of young earth creationism. The pages of my website are open
     to them. They can write anything about the subject of
     creationism they wish to write, and then by digging into the
     details we shall continue to prove that their position is
     false because the facts about the world have already
     falsified it. I will meet them in any written forum open for
     discussion and demonstrate why their position is false. I
     will meet them in any open forum for public discussion,
     whether it be a hotel meeting room, college class room, or
     church auditorium. The home page of this website has carried
     a debate challenge on it almost since its inception, and
     none of these "Open Letter" advocates has taken up the
     challenge.

Of course, since I know that your position is entirely false, I know
that you'll run away from substantive criticism and debate, just like
you guys always do.

Have fun!

Regards,
Todd
From: Larry H. Fain
To: Todd S. Greene
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 3:23 PM
Subject: RE: Archive of discussion of "Open Letter" to Florida College


You dont really call yourself a Christian do you?

--Go away and leave me alone...I dont have time for swine