Re: Newspaper article

Juli Kuhl (
Mon, 27 May 1996 10:12:57 -0400 (EDT)

The answer to your question is yes and yes. You made a direct question
but there seemed to be another embeeded in it by implication; thus my
double "yes". As I read the press release I noticed immediately
the "loaded" questions about the origin of mankind and knew right away
what the "right" answer would have been. It's yet another example of the
blatant bias in the media, and as a former journalist still involved in
media I grieve and do what I can to offset this sinfulness.

How does one effectively refute this bias and help turn it? Like trying
to reverse the direction of a space shuttle during flight inside 40 acres:
only by a miracle of God, however we know Him, through prayer. Not the
lethargic, liturgical, rote prayers of the uncaring and lukewarm, but
urgent, passionate pleading for God's precious will to be done -- the
fervent prayer of righteous men avails much! (Pardon the changing of the
text - Jas 5:16), recognizing God's "right" to permit what He has
designed but also recognizing He is not willing that any should perish
but that all should come to repetance (2 Peter 3:9).

It has been said that there are many believers in journalism; I don't
belong to any professional organizations and so cannot speak to that
authoritatively, but I *can* speak to the question on a local
level: in the past 3 years one of our large local dailies has had frequent
contact by me challenging their priorities and calling attention to their
obvious biases. In response their editor admitted to me that in the
paste up room (where articles are chosen for publication after they are
typeset) there often is discussion... in one particular instance about the
choice of a photograph to go with a not-so-unbiased story about pro-life/
pro-choice events, the editor clearly implied there were pro lifers who
objected to the placement and wording of a story, but the pro choicers
"won" (the editor). In another case I was told that the choice of terms
describing pro-lifers as anti-abortionists is accepted language
nationally; the editor wouldn't budge from her own pro-choice position.

To some extent I think all we can do is keep the pressure on them... hold
them accountable... make them aware... but to do so in genuine,
honest-to-goodness love (respect) that will be seed-sowing, not
confrontational, arrogant, angry rhetoric. As the old saying goes, more
people are loved out of hell than are scared out of it.

What's tragic to me is that it seems this country has believed a
delusion... has our loving Father God sent this delusion as part of the
last days? Uh oh, now we have opened the proverbial can of worms... here
somes calvinism/ armenianism, eschatology (last days theology),
hermeneutics (interpreting the Word). So let me remind readers of this
posting that the passage in 2 Thess 2:11 to which I just referred
*follows* God's statement that "they perish because they refused to love
the truth and so be saved". It goes on to say "for this reason God sends
them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie..." (NIV)

I'd like to close by observing it's one thing to argue among
ourselves (what a presupposition that the pre-saved and unsaved are not
reading along with us!), but quite another to be aware that some very
serious misunderstandings are "out there" in our society (culture) and we
have GOT to be salt and light! But even as common table salt
commercially produced has up to seven chemical additives and is no longer
as "healthy" for us (yes, salt is important for balanced nutrition), so
does biblical truth become tainted by our own biases, whether they are
sincerely formed or not. So to me this means that as "the Lord's servant
(we) must not quarrel; instead (we) must be kind to everyone, able to
teach, not resentful. Those who oppose (us) we must gently instruct, in
the hope that *God* (emphasis mine) will grant them repentance leading
them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses
and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do
his will" (2 Tim 2:24-26 NIV).

What a privilege to be under the direction of the Maestro! As each of us
plays his/her instrument (uses gifts and talents) we will be able to
reach a few... so that by all means we might be used to win some into
the kingdom of His dear Son.

On Sat, 25 May 1996, Kenneth Feucht wrote:

> The Tacoma News Tribune on 24MAY96 had this article by Paul Recer of the
> Associated Press titled Think You know your science? Most don't. It reads
> "Fewer than half of American adults understand that the Earth orbits the sun
> yearly, according to a basic science survey. .. Only bout 25% of American
> adults got passing grades in a survey by the National Science Foundation of
> what people know about basic science and economics, etc. , etc., etc.
> They include sample questions from the quiz, and most are the questions
> demonstrate a bitter sense of triviality, that anyone should know, such as
> 1)The center of the Earth is very hot (T/F) 2)Electrons are smaller than atoms
> (T/F) 3) Which travels faster, light or sound? So on and so forth for the
> questions. Nestled in among the questions that the newspaper included was this
> question 4) Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier
> species of animals (T/F).
> I realize that many ASA'ers might scan over that, or consede the question to
> be true simply on the basis of how God did things. Yet, contextually, to
> answer the question as true implies a world-view as to how we got here, i.e.,
> by divine fiat vs. by chance occurence. Those who are more oriented to seeing
> creation as a 7 literal day event would very accurately answer this question
> as false and yet be counted wrong. Those of us who feel that creation was not
> a gradual event, but instantaneous occurences over seven figurative days would
> also correctly mark this wrongly, according to the people that designed the
> test. Even if you concede that man occured by slow progression with
> intelligent design, the question might be difficult to answer.
> The essense of this test implies that evolution is such a fundamental notion,
> it is as obvious as the center of the earth being hot, or the earth taking a
> year to go around the sun. Do other ASA members find this to be distasteful
> and arrogant on the part of the quiz makers?
> Kenneth A. Feucht, MD, PhD, FACS