Comment to Don

John W. Burgeson (
Mon, 2 Jun 1997 18:41:14 -0400

Don wrote, in part: "No, I don't agree.
The first group - scholars who want to understand how to integrate
biblical theology with science - is very likely where most of us who
interact on this listserv would place ourselves.

But it is the millions (?) of Christians-in-the-pew who are in the third
group - those who look for easy answers so they can win an argument and
justify their casually-reached point of view - who IMO are likely to be
misled by articulate and persuasive speakers and writers. These
fellow-believers, many of whom were in the church pews with us this morning

all over the world ,"

OK, I'll play devil's advocate. Why should I "care" about these people
having a somewhat skewed view of origins? Does it make them less Christian?
(Of course not). Does it interfere with their relationship with God? I
doubt it. It is, after all, theologically speaking, a fairly unimportant
part of our "God-knowledge."

I have some quite close friends who are YECers. They know I don't agree
with them; neither they nor I spend any time in debates over the subject.
It just is not worth it.

Likewise, I have some close friends who are RC; one an ordained priest.
(I'm a Presbyterian, with Baptist, Nazarene, Friends, Church of God,
Evangelical Covenant, and Lutheran roots). I don't recall EVER spending any
time with any of these friends debating which of us is "right" on one item
of theology or another. It just isn't worth it. Positive issues are much
more exciting.

There IS one class of person I get concerned about -- that person who is
taught the YEC position as a child and enters "science." But even such a
person, if he "loses his faith over the issue," must have had less than a
real encounter with God in the first place! Otherwise, he would be able to
work through the arguments.

Are there exceptions to the above. Probably. Are there many such? Probably