The Grand Canyon: Magnificent Witness to Earth’s History

The Grand Canyon is one of the most iconic geological features on Earth.  Its immensity of the canyon regularly causes those that have peered into its depths to wonder about its origins.  How could such an awe-inspiring canyon have formed?

This fascination with the Grand Canyon has fueled a long a history of geological research.  As a result there is a wealth of data that has been used to assess the age of the canyon and its development over time. There have been many books that have detailed the origins of the Grand Canyon and described what seems to be every nook and cranny of the canyon.  There would seem little need of another book which explores its geological history.  But I believe that there is such a need because there is an audience which needs to hear the testimony of the Grand Canyon: much of the modern Christian church.  That audience has different concerns than many that peer into the canyon.  The Grand Canyon forces Christians to confront questions of the age of the Earth and biblical authority.  A book, with the Grand Canyon as its central focus, that addresses those concerns seriously is lacking.

1994 book by young earth creationist' Steve Austin.

1994 book by young earth creationist’ Steve Austin.

This need was made even more apparent with the publication of two books that sought to fill this need with a radical re-reading of the geological record within the confines of a young earth creation paradigm.   In 1994 a young earth creationist named Dr. Steve Austin published a book entitled:  Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe.  In that book Dr. Austin championed an alternative interpretation of the geological history of the Grand Canyon in which the rock layers and the canyon eroded in them were formed less than 5000 years ago.  This represented one particular interpretation to scriptures and application of that interpretation to the geological evidence.

Nine years later, inspired partly by Dr. Austin, Grand Canyon tour guide Tom Vail authored the book Grand Canyon: A Different View. This book of photography of the canyon and more than 20 essays by Young Earth Creationist’ (YEC) authors, including Dr. Austin, was a huge commercial and critical – among creationists – success.  The book was sold at the Grand Canyon bookstore until 2014 generating a fair amount of controversy when it first went on sale.

Tom Vail's book which was sold in the Grand Canyon books store for over 10 years.

Tom Vail’s book which was sold in the Grand Canyon books store for over 10 years.

These books and numerous pamphlets and yearly YEC-sponsored rafting trips down the Grand Canyon, are evidence that YECs have spent considerable effort to explain the Grand Canyon from an explicitly young-earth perspective.

Millions of Christians visit the Grand Canyon each year and most surely ask themselves: how can I understand the origins of the Grand Canyon in a biblical context?  These YEC materials provide what appear to be an answers for those that believe the Bible requires a young earth.

However, many Christians, including the majority of Christian geologists, believe this YEC flood geology explanation for the Grand Canyon to have little scientific merit.  In addition, many Christians, including most Biblical scholars, are critical of the biblical interpretations that YEC’s depend upon to support their understanding of how God’s creation must be interpreted.

How might Christians respond to the claims of young earth creationists?  Is there a better way of understanding the evidence from scriptures and testimony of the Grand Canyon?  How can their age be determined? How can different models of the Grand Canyon’s origins be tested?  Why is it said that the flood geology model is void of explanatory power and thus falls short of showing the canyon is young?

There is a new book about the Grand Canyon that addresses these questions.   This book helps Christians and others examine the question of the age of the Grand Canyon from a science and faith perspective seeking to provide a way of understanding the origins of the Grand Canyon that is faithful to God’s testimony in scripture and his creation.

That book is:  The Grand Canyon: Monument to an Ancient Earth.  The subtitle to the book asks the question that the book answers:  Can Noah’s flood explain the Grand Canyon?

GC-Front-Cover-currentI have been involved in the development of this book from just after its inception.  I am thrilled to be have been able to contribute two chapters that explore plant fossils in the Grand Canyon and more recent animal and plant life in the Grand Canyon.

In all, 11 authors contributed to this book including several that have extensive personal experience with the Grand Canyon geology. As a result, this book brings you the most current understanding of the formation of the Grand Canyon from experts who have developed some of those theories.

In the book we take you on a vivid geological trip through the Grand Canyon examining every aspect of it’s amazing geological formations and exploring how this massive canyon was formed.   We examine many sources of evidence and compare the “flood geology” and conventional geology models to see which makes most sense of the data.

The book is written for pastors, seminary students and lay Christians.  Anyone who has ever wondered about why so many people find the geological evidence for an old age of the Earth so compelling and wonder how that evidence is interpreted will find this book very helpful.

The book is a lesson in geology, an exploration of the age of the Earth debate and an inspiring encounter with one of the most spectacular geological formations in all of God’s creation.

Don’t let the price of the book fool you. This is a high-quality, image-rich, larger-format book.   The authors provided many of the images and donated their talents to make this book possible.  As authors we never intended to make money but rather sacrificed time and money out of a desire to keep the cost as low as possible so that as many pastors and other Christians could afford to purchase this book.  We believe that the Christian community needs to hear the witness of experts who see the evidence from God’s creation every day and have spent much of their lives trying to understand it.

The book is for sale in all eight of the Grand Canyon bookstores. It is my hope that this book will help those that come to see this magnificent witness of God’s creation this summer understand its testimony in the rocks.



  1. Jimmie Montgomery says:

    It was a trip to the Grand Canyon that made me start to doubt my YEC beliefs and many trips up through the Grand Staircase just added to it. Canyonlands and Arches Parks were quite interesting as I thought how did such rocks of the same character be laid down in a flood? Then I found out that many were laid down in a dry climate and that the sandstone contained few fossils. I knew the evidence for the life and resurrection of Christ were quite strong and that is why I believed the Bible in the first place along with a remarkable list of fulfilled prophecies. What to do about Genesis chapter one was my problem. The first verse of chapter two made me think something different was going on. It said “in the day the Lord created them”. Well which was it, six days or one day? I found most explanations rather weak until I read the Literary Framework Hypothesis and it started to come together. As for the Universe running down and animal death on this planet before Adam, well it may be possible that since Christ’s death paid for the sins of all who came before as well as after then the Fall of Adam was the cause of the natural evil and why God had to plant a garden for him and Eve. The Fall was retroactive back in time as well as it affects all of humanity down to today.

    I believe in a literal Adam and Eve as Jesus spoke about them and he spoke about Noah too so these were real people. Doesn’t mean Noah’s flood was global in extent anymore than where the New Testament said the whole world was following or going after Christ. I do not accept a lot of evolutionary theory as the fossils can be interpreted differently, I guess you would call me a progressive creationist and some of the verses in the Bible also indicate that possibly the Angels had a hand in creation as well here on Earth, but that is conjecture and can’t be put forth with any type of certainty.


    • Thanks for sharing some of your story here. We certainly hope the book is helpful to those that may have a lot of questions. No single book is going to provide all the answers as no one has all the answers. We want Christians to not be afraid of looking at this world and still have a sense of awe in what God has created no matter how he has done so.


      • Thanks for this post. I love books, and it sounds like a good read. The endorsements it received certainly can’t hurt it. theses are some top christian scholars. I am not a YEC, ;but also do not buy into much of the evolutionary paradigm. I will order this immediately. I love to read both sides of a story. Again, thanks.


    • jimmie, a couple of books that may be right up your alley are the lost world of adam and eve and the lost world of genesis one, both by john walton, a recognized authority on the old testament and well respected in scholarly circles. He might be helpful in reconciling what you see as contradictions. He respects scripture but also deals with it in a realistic sense without doing damage to it’s message. I’ve read both books, and though, me being me, i may not embrace every viewpoint, i think he is fair and consistent in his approach, and that’s all one can ask. They are available on amazon and also at cbd (christian book distributors. Hope this is helpful.


  2. Jimmie Montgomery says:

    Maybe I should clarify my position. I was a YEC in the 70s and 80s when Noah’s Ark was purported to be able to hold all the land animals that ever existed. I changed my point of view in the late 80s and early 90s. Alan Hayward’s book Creation and Evolution had a big influence on me, but I didn’t read it until the mid 90’s as many Christian Bookstores didn’t carry it except the big chain stores who are probably more about money than doctrine. I have been an OEC for over 20 years. I am the guy at my local church they call when somebody is losing their faith over the Old or New or the TE creation versions. My pastor is YEC, but he doesn’t want young people losing their faith over a nonessential debatable doctrine. The Deity of Christ is more important and His infinite sacrifice which only an Infinite Being could effect and carry through. Cur Deus Homo? Why The God Man by Anselm is a good start. Too many Christians know more about YEC than the Trinity and that is inexcusable.

    Sadly there are too many pastors that would rather lose a member or even a whole family than to call me or somebody like me. Majoring in minors is the expression. I’ve been attacked for not believing in a pre-trib rapture and I don’t even believe in the Trib as I don’t believe in Dispensationalism. I’m in Charles Spurgeon’s camp and he didn’t think the age of the Earth was a big deal either. Believe it or not, but I have several of John Macarthur’s commentaries. I disagree with him on some interpretations. I also consider him an able Bible teacher.

    Believe it or not I’m not confused about the time of Creation. I’m more concerned with living as the Lord would have me as best as I can. I would bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding and cater it too. If they want a Christian influence at their celebration, by George they will get one! Our Lord and Savior dined with a hated tax collector and called him down from a tree telling Zacchaeus that He would be dining with him. He went where He was needed most and so should we all.


  3. Pfft, this book is clearly nonsense. It can’t explain away all the compelling folk tales after all.


    • yes, I saw that AiG entry yesterday. I expect that there will be many more Grand Canyon related articles coming from AiG and ICR in the coming months. Clearly they led off with their best stuff:-)


      • One thing I find interesting about AiG is how they indirectly respond to “pop-culture”. A book or a TV show comes out about an evolution-related topic and they suddenly start posting about it. Yet relatively few of these will be in direct response to the original post.


        • I have noticed this as well. Part of it is just a lack of time to write new material. They just go into the archives and pull out items that relate. I suppose the idea is that the public will hear a story and it will be in their mind and then they will see a related article on ICR and think, Oh this sounds interesting. When I posted about Dr. Purdom’s problems with definitions, Ken Ham and AiG both posted numerous articles about natural selection and evolution. Ken Ham went on a Twitter rant about “real science” and natural selection not being evolution. It was too much of a coincidence to not be related. I don’t expect a direct response. They don’t want to direct their audience to the specific source unless that source is so important that they can’t afford to ignore it. I am not important enough to respond directly too but nonetheless they feel they have to present some response.


          • I always suspected the more conspiratorial angle, given the (a) infrequency with which they reference stuff and (b) the fact they seem at least passingly aware of these other sources.

            Although you’re right; the frequency with which news must be published also probably feeds into this.


  4. You can trust anything from Carol Hill for objective factuality when dealing with the rock record. Not having seen their book, I can hope that, toward the end, it deals with the lack of evidence for what YECs claim for the end of the Flood. Supposedly, maybe a couple thousand feet of “Flood deposits” had to be hauled away again to expose Shiprock and Devils Tower (etc., etc.). With no arm-waving at all, it is claimed that “sheet erosion” took everything to the Gulf of Mexico. SO…Where are there any great, long ripple marks across Oklahoma and other states? And WHY would a simple, one-way worldwide “ebb tide” lasting a few months at the end of the Flood want to expose the Kaibab south of Grand Canyon, all this material somehow rushing away SW to the Pacific? I’m content to see a worldwide Flood at 6000 BC, and an appearance of “change through time” being entirely a creation of God, who ONLY is unchanging and eternal – and who “hides” himself (Isaiah 45:15). GLL


  5. Douglas Jack says:

    I’m just the opposite of most of the posters here. I was OEC most of my life. I discovered YEC, AIG, and CMI 7or8 years ago. I’ve read volumes on both paradigms, and concluded, one can’t be a Biblical literalist and OEC at the same time. Simply put, if Adam and Eve are real people, and the first humans, progenitors of the human race, the race can’t have been here millions of years. There’s absolutely no recorded history from antiquity to support any such premise. Some serious research has shown that genetic entropy, alone will destroy the human race in a few thousand years. As a matter of fact the book of Exodus probably written 1400-1500 BC is the first prohibition given by God against close relatives marrying. Life spans were severely reduced within a few generations from the flood.
    The same goes for the doctrine of original sin, God would not declare everything very good, pertaining to creation, if His creation was inundated with disease, death and suffering.
    The law of non-contradiction seems to be operative. The earth simply can’t be less than 10,000 years old and 4,3 billion years old at the same time. Scientific theories used to determine what happened in the past are interpretive, forencic science if you will. They can’t be tested in the present. The evolutionary claims made by non theists fail profoundly unless there’s millions or billions of years.
    The dating methods they claim to be so accurate are all based on evolutionary assumptions and circular reasoning. For instance, they apply uniformatarian geology to the depositional strata, then date fossils according to the strata, if ambiguity exists when assigning dates to fossils, they reference the strata they’re found in (using uniformitarian assumptions). They assume radiometric decay has been constant for billions of years, they assume the beginning ratio of isotope to parent element, they assume neither parent or daughter isotopes have been added or reduced, everything concerned with radiometric dating is based on assumptions. They perform spectriometric tests and if the results don’t fall into line with evolutionary time frames, they claim contamination and discard the samples. When radiometric testing indicates lava flows on Mt St Helens (formed in 1980) 80,000 to 3 million years old, we should question their procedures and assumptions.
    Most Christians hold that either YEC or OEC is not a sorteriology issue, I agree, but it does happen to be a Biblical inerrancy issue. Does one believe the straight forward reading of Genesis or a human scienetific theory?


    • Jimmie Montgomery says:

      I can believe both and do believe in a straightforward interpretation of Genesis. If you want to interpret it in a wooden literal sense then you have to explain why it says God created everything in one day. The first verse of Genesis says God created the heavens and the Earth period. Do you know the history of the doctrine of inerrancy? It was elaborated by B.B. Warfield at Princeton and is as much an interpretation of man as YEC is. I am a Biblical infallibilist as I guess I spent too much time reading the Puritans. You try to put it out in such a way that I can’t believe in the Bible unless I believe in YEC and it is an old tactic of YECs going back a long time. The Bible is infallible not inerrant and I am sure you do not know the difference. To be inerrant the Bible could contain no mistakes in genealogy or science. Yet there are different genealogies given in different parts of the Bible from Genesis. John Morris said as much in his commentary on Genesis. He said there could be gaps, but that flies in the face of inerrancy. Does the Earth sit on pillars and are there four corners of the Earth and did the whole world go after Jesus? Did you know why missionaries had a hard time in China when they first went there? It was because the Chinese genealogies went back further than the ones in Genesis. Many of the Chinese became christians after the missionaries stopped insisting that their history was wrong. In doctrine and history there are no mistakes in the Bible, but that doesn’t mean there are no mistakes of memory or that the prejudices of a writer are supposed to be followed. Am I supposed to believe that all the people from Crete are lazy and shiftless? Paul said they all were. Paul also said for wives to submit to their husbands and then he turned around and said husbands and wives were to submit to each other. Which one should I follow? Inerrantists have messed some people royally up. I have seen it with my own eyes a wife being commanded to stay with an abusive husband and their children have to stay there too. There are Biblical principles that are not to be violated, but wisdom is justified by her children is one that too many christians do not pay attention too. Then there are the weightier matters of the law and I’m sure it doesn’t mean a wife has to submit to abuse or allow her children to be abused either, but an inerrant interpretation says so.

      As I said above I am a christian because of the evidence for the life and death and resurrection of Jesus. I also won’t be told that I’m not following the Bible correctly because I happen to know some facts about geology that YECs ignore. I would suggest you read the testimony of Greg Morton who wrote for ICR and went into the oil geology field and found out that what he learned at ICR’s Heritage college wasn’t all there was to know. He knew many christians who had a crisis of faith because of what they learned actually working in the field. Kind of hard to believe in a YEC interpretation when you are directly involved in data that contradicts it. As the Lord Himself said, “Wisdom is justified by her children.” A Biblical principle indeed to be followed.


      • you sound a bit defensive jimmie. And caricatures don’t further the argument. Insults don’t help either. Can the fear and deal with the issues. No one is threatening you or telling what you have to believe. You can believe whatever you want. Someone who doesn’t agree with you isn’t a scary monster and no one is telling you what to believe or insinuating you aren’t christian. They are just pointing out some apparent difficulties with different positions. Many christians are terribly poor theologians and philosophers, and thus don’t even notice the inconsistencies or contradictions in their position. And many of your points are simplistic and facetious. One day. Six days. Wife and child abuse. Try not to be silly. you don’t want to be literalistic, then don’t be. But don’t pretend those who are are simplistic or barbaric. They have just as cohesive a paradigm as you think you do.


      • Jimmie Montgomery says:

        This is the insult I was answering.

        “Does one believe the straight forward reading of Genesis or a human scienetific theory?”

        Apparently one cannot believe in the Bible and not be a YEC or believe in science either except the science of Ken Ham.

        Not being told what to believe? No just being told I do not believe in the Bible rightly understood and you know that. Simplistic and facetious? I can point you to several churches where wives submit to your husbands” trumps abusive treatment and you know it. Where is the insult? I do believe being told many times by YECs that I trust science and uniformitarian/evolutionary science more than the Bible is an insult thrown in the face of OECs all the time. If you do not believe in OEC why are you here except to set us all straight as I have had so many christians at church do to me. I don’t preach OEC, but they feel it is their duty to go out of their way to teach me “proper Bible”. Then they wonder why their children can’t handle college unless it is of course a christian college, but many have gone into field work and lost their faith, because the only way to believe the bible is that it teaches the world is 6,000 years old. I remember when tree rings on top of mountains were considered evidence that the flood happened about 4500 years ago. It all got changed according to one YEC who told me that the oldest tree was only about 2800 years old as they could grow several rings a year. He didn’t like that using tree rings you can accurately date back about 11,000 year and that is too old. Oh, and dendrochronology was used to calibrate C-14 dating. Don’t talk to me about simplistic.


        • well jimmie, i can only call you exceptional. In my forty plus years of being christian i can honestly say i have never, not once, had experiences like you have. Did you attend that inbred baptist church that’s in the news all the time with their hate of all things not them? I can only advise you not to return. And again, my point stands. Calling people names, stupid, old-fashioned, etc. does nothing to further whatever point you are trying make. And insinuating that all yec believers don’t think you are christian is, well, over-blown and a useless genetic fallacy. I myself am not yec, but know plenty that are, and have never experienced any of the closed-minded attitudes that you have. I have also met plenty of the AIG staff and was never accused of being of satan, or unchristian, etc.
          As you are obviously easily offended, i suggest you flock with birds of your feather. Either way, none of these dislikes or grudges you have (what does male-female hierarchy issues have to do with evolution anyway) contribute to the issue at hand. Get over it and move on. Heard of forgiveness? Might help.


    • good post. good questions. agree


  6. Trevor says:

    Joel, have you or anyone else considered sponsoring a debate between some of the authors of A Different View and Monument to an Ancient Earth?


  7. jon risser says:

    Great book, The facts and evidence are just plain indisputable. As an ex- YEC advocate I wish there were more open minded YEC people that would sit and read this with common sense. The YEC answer to almost everything science is the flood. The flood is barely mentioned anywhere else in the bible except genesis and describes as God using natural processes. Rain (gates of heaven opening up) , Rising waters and flooding rivers/lakes etc (fountains of deep). Rain stops in 40 days and water slowly recedes to the places it was before. No massive tearing apart of the land laying down fossils in order of advancing complexity with younger layers. All dating mechanisms in order of deposit. No discussion in the flood account of massive volcanoes. No discussion of catastrophic plate tectonics.
    The evidence against a young earth and global flood as demonstrated in this book is beyond refute. Great job on the book and I pray more people will read this and help them come to a rational conclusion. Most important that God is responsible for all creation and he did over billions of years and its amazing.


  8. glad you have found a belief paradigm you are comfortable with. That only proves, of course, that you are comfortable with it. and nothing in any book written by any person is beyond refute. i used to be and still am a yec. but i am also an ouc (old universe creationist). See, just another viewpoint that i am comfortable with but not beyond refute. while i am sure there are some yec who are stubborn or obstinate in their viewpoints (no less i am sure than some evolutionists, of all stripes) the ones i come in contact with are quite open minded. they just want to be intellectually honest in their beliefs. The bible indeed says nothing about volcanoes or plate tectonics. It also says nothing (least of all give the impression) about a 14 billion year old universe nor the process of evolution. Everyone, of all opinions, have “some splainin to do”. We must be gracious in allowing others to search for themselves.


  9. jon risser says:

    Chuck, Its not just the book, its the evidence that was very well presented in the book that I feel is beyond refute, I am not relying on a single source as you imply. there is mountains of evidence.I am not sure what mean by being YEC and OUC . Im assuming Gap theory?


  10. thanks for your reply. and I did not state, or I believe imply, that you were only relying on this one book. It just happens to be what you referred to. As for yec, you referred to it in your post, so I would assume you knew what it stood for. As for ouc, I explained it following my reference to it, so I have already provided the meaning.
    You certainly are entitled to whatever opinion you have of anything. My point was, and is, to not be irritated or frustrated by people who differ with you, in this case, yec. You yourself point out that you used to be one, so I would assume that however you describe them now is how you yourself used to be. This is one thing I have noticed. People who once held an opinion are quick and vitriolic in their criticisms of people who now hold that same opinion..Is that how you would have wanted to have been treated as an yec? Probably not.
    I’m just suggesting that, contrary to your apparent opinion and many others likewise, advocates of different opinions usually can marshal mountains of “evidence” to support their viewpoint. As much as we all are comfortable believing that we, of course, have the “right viewpoint”, life teaches us that what we think is true today might not be the “truth” ten, twenty, or fifty years from now. As you now believe you were once wrong, you and I should allow others the same privilege to change or investigate what they believe.
    As one who has followed the creation vs evolution, old earth vs young earth debates for over 40 years, I have witnessed “truths” from both sides being used for years then suddenly dumped when its adherents realized that the supposed truths weren’t true after all. We just need to discuss and debate the issues without personal attacks or caricatures of those whose viewpoints we oppose. I applaud your enthusiasm for truth. You may now be right. Or, as you discovered when you were yec, you may now be wrong. Grace is the key word here. As Christians who have received it freely, we should give it freely. Blessings.


  11. jon risser says:

    Chuck, I have also been at this for over 40 years. If the flood is responsible for all the earth layers, and fossils and mountains, and the YEC pseudoscience is your explanation for everything, and since this blog is related to the evidence in the book we are discussing (grand canyon) which only reveals a portion of the earths geological history, then please give me one single scientific evidence in the grand canyon that dates 4500 years. After all the flood ended 4500 years ago so why is there nothing that dates anywhere near that date. No judgement by my question in a general sense, just you and me. I would love just one example. I cant find any. Kind of like trying to support geocntricism or flat earth –No legitimate support.


  12. well, first we would have to assume that whoever was doing the “measuring” or “dating” would come to it without any presuppositions or assumptions, and that of course, is not going happen, on either side. Plus, your question is rather generic, ie. find something that dates to 4500 years ago. I’m not quite sure that is how dating is done, except between very old people. Having never explored the Grand Canyon, and don’t know that I ever am. i’m afraid I can be of no use to you. And not having read every single aig book in existence, I have no refutation that no one has found anything dating 4500 years ago. I think I can state, without refute, that any secular or old earth scientist who was using any dating method there who got a reading of 4500+- would quickly discard the reading as an equipment error. It’s done all the time. Doesn’t mean they are evil or devious, they are just obligated, from their prior commitment to an ancient earth.
    And seeing as how my post to you had nothing to do with dating the Grand Canyon, are you just blowing smoke to obfuscate the issue I addressed? I was addressing your attitude and encouraging a little compassion and slack, while pointing out to you that equally brilliant people can believe two very opposite things about an issue, and do so sincerely. So honesty and intelligence does not guarantee result. So perhaps a dose of humility might be in order. You did not reply to my main topic.
    Back to the irrelevant point, you say that NOTHING in the Grand Canyon dates to 4500 years. Has EVERYTHING in and at the Grand Canyon been dated? Where did you get this assumption and/or idea. It sounds like a sweeping statement that has less to do with science than with philosophy. As you seem aware of dating systems, you are undoubtedly aware that they can give dates with very wide variances from the same area. Surely you would be aware of the fact that when the Mt. St. Helens lava flows were dated a few years after the event, dates ranging from 80,000 to 3,000,000 years were returned. JJJJJJJJJJUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTT a little off, wouldn’t you say. My point is, we need to be careful about celebrating our wins and ignoring our losses, so to speak. Science is not perfect. Neither are people. Perhaps the yec are wrong. What they are attempting to do is to be intellectually honest about their method of scriptural interpretation. It says six days (and yes, it actually does say six days) for creation. You want to make that 6 billion years. Fine. Just don’t be upset if someone talks about Jesus being in the grave for 3 million years, or if someone preaches from the 27 commandments, or that the Sabbath day should be celebrated every 700,000 years. Literalists, while accepting scripture uses different genres, symbols, allegories, parables, etc. think that the bible should be interpreted literally unless context or etymology requires otherwise. And who are we to disagree?
    As I said, I am yec/ouc. Many would scatch their heads over that one, but if you are concurrent with studies in relativity and quantum physics, I believe a way has been found to satisfy both sides. I doubt though, that any of them will toss aside a lifetime of work and admit they may have been wrong all along, or almost right without seeing it. So I don’t argue the details much. Just like to see a friendly and graceful exchange of ideas. It’s not a contest, Jon. Winners don’t get to go to heaven and losers go to hell. In and of itself, it’s almost an irrelevancy. And believe me my friend, Christians who accept evolution have way more questions to answer than they care to admit when it comes to scripture. So let’s be kind. And gentle. All furry and lovable. God loves both sides , you know.


  13. jon risser says:

    That was the longest non answer I have ever seen. The reason there is nothing dated to the 4500 years since the flood (Hundreds of thousand dates documented with multiple dating techniques) is because the grand Canyon was clearly not formed by the biblical global flood geology theory. By the way you need to update. The Steve Austin deceptive dating of Mt st Helens was nothing but a shoddy attempt to use a particular limitation in a dating technique that he clearly knew about before he produced a expected bogus date. Look it up! Sad part is he and people like you continue to use this as an argument to discredit radiometric dating. The dates in the grand canyon layers are consitent, repeated over and over and over. The bottom layers are the oldest , the top layers are the youngest. The old bottom layers have primitive simple fossils and the become more complex as you go up to the younger formations. By the way- Have you actually read this book that we are commenting on or are you just hear to bloviate?


  14. Grow up jon and quit whining. The “deception” that AIG practiced was not telling the university where the samples were from, for reasons even you can understand. And bloviate all you want, there is no place on earth where the theoretical geologic column is found complete and in order.
    For my purposes, i could give a rat’s butt how old the earth is, or the universe. Doesn’t affect me at all. Could be 14 billion years or 14 minutes. Has no influence in or on my life whatsoever. So if it’s that life threatening to you, please feel free to think the Grand Canyon is as old as you need it to be. Whatever stirs your coffee.
    And finally, good job completely ignoring the gist of my post. Your reply was even more juvenile than the one i replied to. Even more insulting and accusatory. You should be ashamed to call yourself a christian and indulge in the childish and rude rantings you post. I was trying to encourage you to indulge other people rights to different opinions than yours without judging their character and motives. Looks like that was one exhortation completely wasted. Oh well, you and Christ deal with it. I did my part. As they say, only God can soften a heart. I’ll just trust in Him to speak to you.



  1. […] The Grand Canyon’s Magnificent Witness to Earth’s History– Often, young earth creationists argue that the Grand Canyon can only be explained (or at least is better explained) by the biblical Flood as a global flood. A new book is challenging that perception. Check out this post to learn more. […]


Comments or Questions?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: