Just came back from dinner with two other couples. My girl friend has requested that I not get involved in political or religious debates with her friends, so I remained very quiet for most of the evening.

Two of the people are born again Christians, while the other two are Christians who are technical types and believers in evolution and the current scientific view of the history of the universe. As an atheist, I consider the born again Christians to be more logically consistent, but father from reality.

Perhaps it is just as well that I did not get involved. A little more fuel added to the fire might have resulted in violence and blood shed.

I have always wondered why most Christian fundamentalists ignore the Mature Universe argument, which seems to provide excellent support for their point of view.

What do some of you think of this theory?

To understand this concept, consider a tree growing in the Garden of Ede a week or two after creation. What would you see if you cut it down and polished the stump? I imagine that you would see growth rings suggesting a tree 50-150 years old, even though it had been created at most a month or so earlier.

Similarly, why could god not create a universe with stars which seem to be billions of light years away and an earth which seems to be billions of years old? This concept is logically consistent and avoids the problem of finding alternate explanations for geology and astrophysics. Claiming that the Grand Canyon was created in a short time due to the Flood at the time of Noah seems weak in comparison with the Mature Universe Theory.

Do any Christians take this approach to explaining creation as described in Genesis?

Perhaps Christians avoid this idea because it makes god out to be a practical joker who delights in fooling the scientists.