Re: LC

Jan de Koning (
Thu, 27 Mar 1997 11:59:19 -0500

Is it possible to neatly divide all the members of the ASA in particular
groups? I am afraid that you will then have often groups of one, and you
will not have letters enough for short abreviations. Besides it is hard to
remember what all these letters stand for. If "LC" indeed means what I
think, literal creation (?), all members of ASA are probably LC. The use
of abreviations should be prohibited, unless you caarefully define what the
letters stand for in each posting.

For example, I feel uncomfortable with neatly dividing a group in
Creationists and Scientists. Then Young Earth Creationists and
Creationists who assume a longer period, but still accept the Genesis
account "literally" belong in the same group. Or, even though I believe,
that God created using evolution, I still think that then we have not come
to the bottom of the differences. You have then "biblical" evolutionists
and "scientific" evolutionists, who believe in the bible.

As for myself: I believe, that the scientific method is based on a
unchristian philosophy taken over from the world. That method will still
try to obtain results without seriously researching the background of
presuppositions needed to come to results. A Christian needs to take the
bible seriously, that is, for example, the Fall in sin, and its results as
described in the book of Romans. Chapter 8 tells how all creature awaits
the "revealing of the children of God" (vs19) and then follows how creation
is waiting to be set free from decay. How do we take that into account in
our scholarly enterprise?

Furthermore the term "Science" as used in English speaking countries is
confusing. What belongs to Science? Psychology? Or is everything which
is a science about things you can see and feel? Is Psychology than an Art?
As you know all learning on the continent of Europe the Germans call
"Wissenschaft." That is much more than Science. The way the word
"science" is used here hides the fact, that it is also based on a
philosophy. The scientific method is based on a naturalistic philosophy.
Because of that what I call "philosophy" is then called "theology," because
the foundation of my philosophy of everything is based on biblical
insights. I realize, that for most "scientists" in N.America that
conception is hard to understand. That is why I do not mention it often.
But when you start dividing people in groups, it is important to realize,
that everyone has a philosophy of life, and that it is unlikely that you
catch evryone by labelling.

Added to these difficulties, add the difficulty that the Bible was written
in a foreign language. First it was spoken and read in a culture, which we
do not understand. Consequently all translating is interpreting.
Sometimes one word is translated by two different words. Example: John 3:8
where "wind" and "spirit" in Greek are both "pneuma". Add to that that we
grew up in a culture in which Christianity becomes gradually a minority,
that most of us studied at secular insttutions, where a humanist philosophy
was the guiding principle, and you have the maaking of many groups. Is it
possible to have letter for all?

Also, the biblical word "Truth" is much mor than "conform the facts." The
basic meaaning is much more like "troth," as is clear for example in the
story of Rahab in the book Joshua. She was blessed for hiding the spies,
though she lied to accomplish that. More examples may be found. So,
"truth" is not always straight forward either.

Jan de Koning
Willowdale, Ont.