As you will discover at Todd's site, he was formerly a member of the church of Christ. As he explained to me, he left that form of doctrine over confrontations with those of that faith who would tolerate only young-earth ICR-type of beliefs concerning creation. Ultimately this led Todd to a position I believe represents a sincere posture of intellectual skepticism as he continues his quest in seeking truth. Though he has told me he has rejected his faith entirely, I am not fully convinced this is correct. Todd's website shows he has the requisite fire for truth. However, I am not going to attempt to reconvert Todd to the church of Christ. That is between he and God. He knows all the arguments and scriptures I would present to him as well as I, if not better. Todd first contacted me through this LIB website with a very personable letter. I am deeply appreciative of his concern for these issues and truth. I only wish I could have met Todd many years earlier. If so, we might find ourselves now working together defending Jesus as Lord among a skeptical world desperately seeking for some true meaning in this life of uncertainty. That option is still open.

I believe Todd's position of skepticism yet serves a valuable purpose for those of us who are believers, and especially those of us who are members of a church of Christ congregation. Todd is a classic example (though tragic for me personally) of what can happen to a young person who has been given no study options other than, "Believe its young, or you can't believe anything. We don't really want your kind of questions here anyway."  Hopefully the work of "Lord, I Believe" will continue to help some of my brothers and sisters, and especially young people, see that there are rational options which can sustain faith when confronted with believable evidence which contradicts cherished dogmas, such as a 4004 BC creation. My personal grief is the untold number of  "Todds" that have likewise been sacrificed on our human altars of time. I have felt those flames myself. There is another way!

Some of my well-meaning brethren wish we would just drop all aspects of time discussions from our presentations. That would certainly be the easy way. Todd is why we cannot go that way. If all brethren would keep all views concerning the age of creation between them and God, we wouldn't have to address the topic. But that is not likely to happen any time soon. We teach what we believe is the truth of the matter: that the Bible does not require one to believe the creation is ancient or recent (the Bible's silence on the matter permits one to believe whatever age wished). We teach that Genesis is a true and simple account of the awesome primary miracle. The creation is the result of the power of God's word, purpose and love for man. We teach that the naturalistic world view which embraces macro-evolution as an alternative to God and creation is a philosophy, not scientific fact at all. We show that the overwhelming evidence in the natural world points one to seek an intelligent designer as the ultimate explanation of our own existence and the anthropic nature of creation itself. Though it is based on evidence, it is a position of faith. We show that the God of the Bible is the logical choice for the identity of that transcendent designer. We show that it is rational to accept the testimonial evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, thus proving He was as He claimed: the Son of God and mankind's Savior and Lord. Lord, I Believe!

Todd, would you like to add anything to this?

BACK to Main LIB Links Page

Some Others Who Have Stumbled Over Similar Issues:
 Dr. Joshua Zorn: Another Case But How It Can End Differently
 Stephen Robertson: A Former ICR Geologist
Also meet "Ed" who could easily have walked the same road as Todd
Glenn R. Morton too