>The logic of your argument requires that YECs
>be barred from the ASA because of scientific & theological errors.
If that was the standard we wouldn't have any members at all.
> I agree that they are wrong, both scientifically & theologically.
Let's shake hands on that.
>But if we are to start removing & barring those we think to be in error,
we're in for a blood >bath.
Yet again I agree. Granting them a forum to spread their strange doctrine,
however, does not automatically convey with membership. ASA published
articles require peer review. And published positions or methods of
apology should meet at least two tests:
1. Does it comply with the Word of God?
2. Is it scientifically feasible?
YEC fails on both counts.
>YECs are profoundly wrong in their science, but to say they have "no
>suggests that they _know_ their position is wrong & that they argue for it
Some are making their living at it. Some have vested interests. Some are
victims of deception. Some don't know any better. It runs the gamut. But
I can name a few in the inner circles who are well aware of contrary
evidence and deliberately suppress it.
>Exodus 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and
>is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the
>and hallowed it.
If Moses had not clarified that in Psalm 90:4, they would have a point.
Scripture oftentimes clarifies Scripture. YEC's argue about "evening" and
"morning" too, but its usage is further defined elsewhere. In Psalm 90,
humans are likened to grass. “In the morning it flourisheth, and groweth
up; in the evening it is cut down, and withereth” (Psa. 90:6).
Perry Phillips of IBRI said this:
"I know of no grass that literally springs up in the morning and then is
dead by the same evening. Rather, the psalmist has in mind the life cycle
of grass in the Levant, which begins its growth with the November rains and
dies with the hot, dry, March, desert winds. In this psalm, therefore,
`morning` stands for the period of growth and `evening` stands for the
period of death."
>Of course I'm not really going to argue for a 6000 year old earth on this
>basis, but the idea that you can prove the earth to be millions of years
old on the
>basis of the texts you cite...
The biblical text does not "prove" an old earth, it implies it. A plethora
of scientific evidence mandates it. Any advocates of a doctrine who pick
their Scriptures out that serve to support their theory, while ignoring
other Scripture verses that run contrary to their view, are likely to do
their science the same way. Now you don't suppose YECs would ignore any
scientific evidence, do you George?
In the 1982 McLean vs. Arkansas Board of Education decision, Judge William
Overton said: “While anybody is free to approach a scientific inquiry in
any fashion they choose, they cannot properly describe the methodology used
as scientific, if they start with a conclusion and refuse to change it
regardless of the evidence developed during the course of the investigation."
Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago."