Re: Electrical Engineering

Bill Frix (
Tue, 25 Mar 1997 15:11:00 GMT-5

To reply to Dick Fischer's comment of 24 Mar 1997 18:38:

Dick wrote:
> Since you contend you believe in the young earth hypothesis based upon
> scientific methods, could you name any scientists who are also persuaded
> that the earth is only a few thousand years old but are not influenced
> by Judeo-Christian tradition? If YEC can be deduced by careful analysis
> of data and evidence, and is not a direct result of religious dogma, than
> we should expect non-Christian, non-Jewish scientists to be similarly
> persuaded. Who are they?

Sorry, Dick, but I have heard this type of argument at Candler School
of Theology at Emory University. Essentially, the import is that,
unless someone believes in the young earth position but does not
believe in the Judeo-Christian viewpoint, this position is
religiously tainted and is therefore not admissible as factual
information. Otherwise I would point out Henry Morris or Duane Gish
of CRI.

Nevertheless, at Candler, the argument went something like this:
unless you can find an authority who is not a Christian yet believes
in the literal resurrection of Jesus, the resurrection is not
admissible as fact but is "a faith interpretation to explain the
death of Jesus." As I pointed out to them then, this is fallacious
reasoning: belief in the literal resurrection is a pre-requisite for
a person being a Christian - anyone who truly believes Jesus rose
from the dead yet rejects His claims on their life is either insane
or antagonistic. Either of these characteristics render the person
unacceptable as a witness.

Now, assuming I _could_ interview every scientist and engineer in the
world who believes in the literal account of the creation of the
universe (and that is an impossible task, as you know), I may find
some follower of Islam or an aboriginal (American or Australian)
religion that believes that God literally created the universe
without evolution. However, you would (probably) reject these people
also, claiming their viewpoints are clouded by their religious

Herein lies the fallacy of your argument: the belief that the
universe was created without benefit of evolution requires a priori
a belief in either a cosmic chicken or a divine creator. Ergo, a
person who believes the universe was created, not evolved, must be
influenced by their religious beliefs, whether Jewish, Christian or

Finally, if I find witnesses, they will be suspect due to their
religious "dogma". If I find no witnesses, what does that matter?
Galileo believed the earth revolved around the sun but the
"scientific community" of his day rejected that position. Reality
is not subject to opinion polls and is not a matter for "majority
rules" votings. As an aside, too many people seem to think that
Heaven will be a democracy, so let's vote on the policies there.
Anyway, the universe was created by and maintained by God; that is
the ultimate reality (call it dogma if you wish - you can call a
skunk a cat but the skunk knows what it is). The opinions of a
planetful of "scientists" will not change reality, only their
perception of it.

"... Rather, let God be found true, though every man {be found} a
liar, as it is written, "That Thou mightest be justified in Thy
words, and mightest prevail when Thou art judged." (Rom 3:4, NAS)

William M. Frix
Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering
Box 3021
John Brown University
Siloam Springs, AR 72761
Phone: (501) 524-7466
FAX: (501) 524-7499