1. I've heard that carbon-14 dating cannot really be trusted to give accurate dates.

2. Is it possible that the moment of creation may be more recent because the mountains have not eroded away?

3. Why worry about the scientific accuracy of the Bible when it is clear that science and religion never mix anyway?

4. What I want is absolute proof for the existence of God. Why can't any Christian give that to me?

5. I keep running into people who claim that Armageddon is just around the corner. But people having been saying that for decades. What do you think?

I've heard that carbon-14 dating cannot really be trusted to give accurate dates.

There are several different ways of using radiometric methods to date things. Each is applicable over their own range. C-14 has a half-life of 5700 years. That means it takes 5700 years for half of a C-14 sample to decay, then another 5700 years for half that to decay, etc., until it's gone. Therefore, C-14 is good for samples no younger than a couple hundred years (not enough has decayed), and no good for samples over 50,000 years (too little left).

Another problem is that the sample has to be pure. If one has a sample that is a mixture of young and old stuff, the results will be inaccurate with dates somewhere between the young and old. And it will come with huge error bars which tells us how accurate it is (e.g. 4300 +/- 10 years is pretty good; 4300 +/- 1000 years stinks.)

Another problem with C-14 is that it is formed by cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere. Supernovae cause cosmic rays, so some past supernova in the neighborhood could have flooded the planet with cosmic rays and increased the amount of C-14 - without us even knowing it. There was a supernova in the vicinity 8-14,000 years ago which probably gave us a huge influx of C-14.

So C-14 can be used to accurately date pure samples through most of human history (it is one way of dating biblical scrolls). But before that only relative dates can be guaranteed, i.e. until we find out how much supernovae influenced C-14 production in the distant past, we can only conclude, for older materials, that a particular sample is older or younger than another.

Is it possible that the moment of creation may be more recent because the mountains have not eroded away?

Wind and water have a tendency to erode away mountains at a rate of about .05 millimeters a year. At this rate the continents which average about 800 meters elevation would erode away in about 16 million years. But continents exist, so the earth must be fairly young. So say some creationists. But there's a problem.

Continents are built up as fast as they erode. How, you may ask? Lava flows, coral reef growth, and plate tectonic movement add to the continents continuously. Lava flows in Hawaii recently added several square miles. As India continues to crash into Eurasia, the Himalayas are lifted up more than a centimeter a year! And here in Southern California we observe sudden increases in height of several inches in local mountains after earthquakes.

Hence, in our humble opinion, the erosion argument for a young earth is bad, but God's revelation through nature remains completely consistent with a creation date of billions of years.

Why worry about the scientific accuracy of the Bible when it is clear that science and religion never mix anyway?

Whenever science and Christianity are isolated from one another. the science becomes materialistic and atheistic and Christianity loses its objective foundation.

Let's be honest. Science is not religiously neutral. Science deals with cause and effect. Whether the scientist admits it or not, causes can be natural or supernatural. In the case of the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the appearance of new species, science can provide no natural causes and instead science (although not scientists) points to supernatural causes. In the case of the universe, evidence abounds that the cause must transcend matter, energy, space, and time. That is, the cause must be outside of nature - supernatural.

Here's the part that riles a lot of hard-headed Christians:

Similarly, faith is not scientifically neutral. The New Testament defines faith as belief and follow-through based on established facts. We have never seen a fundamental particle called a neutrino. But, I have faith in its existence and act accordingly, because of certain irrefutable facts. As a Christian, we have never seen God. But, we have faith in His existence and act accordingly because of certain irrefutable facts.

Remember science is a tool and scientists who are Christians use it as a tool - a means to an end - just as we use logic and reason as a tool, to discover more about our Creator and how He makes this whole place work.