Todd et al.,
Do you not see that the comments of the non-YEC views are themselves
Again I quote you, "There is a standing joke among many atheists in online
that Henry Morris and Duane Gish are covert members of the worldwide
atheist conspiracy (WAC), his efforts with YEC being very successful in
efforts to discredit Christianity by atheists antagonistic to religion.
*The Screwtape Letters* in real life."
This posting does not distinguish whether the demonic character you ascribe
to these gentlemen is evident from their YEC view or their purported
exclusivity. But that is immaterial. They reveal your own exclusivity and
Again, how about some science discussion...
For example, can anyone point me to an evolutionary explanation for the
development of complementary mutations in members of interacting species?
By complementary, I mean a mutation in one species that results in the
production of a molecule that to be effective (in terms of enhancing
fitness) must be met with a mutation in another species that produces a
corresponding receptor. Is chance the only explanation?
From: Todd S. Greene [SMTP:email@example.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: Why?/Re: Answersingenesis
I appreciate your comments, and I think I see what you are referring to.
What I observe is non-YECs considering the *divisive attitude* itself
(which is a typical, but not inherent, feature of the YEC approach) as
being what is suspect. I thought I was being clear about this
distinction in my previous comments. I thought Moorad, for example, was
very explicit in his remarks, that he believed it was the divisive
attitude (which I typically refer to as the "exclusivist" attitude)
itself that deserved condemnation, not the mere adherence to a belief in
young earth creationism.
Thus, you have to distinguish between the condemning of the exclusivist
attitude, on the one hand, from the mere espousal of young earth
creationism, on the other. Why don't you ask each of these people that
you have quoted from, and explicitly ask them if they are (1) willing
to consider a Christian's faith "suspect" for believing the YEC
doctrine, and (2) willing to condemn the divisiveness that many YECs
promote. Again, I wager that what you will find is that non-YECs are
referring to the latter, not the former.
Of course, there is always the question, "Are YECs justified in being
divisive against those Christians who disagree with YEC?" And this you
have not discussed.
Incidentally, yes, I read your entire post.
Todd S. Greene
###### Gregory P. Kerr, 4/3/01 11:29 AM ######
"Young earth creationists (very many, while I will acknowledge that it
is not all of them) have clearly made this an issue which divides the
good Christians from the bad Christians. Since this is the true
situation, there is something clearly wrong with turning around and
saying, as you are apparently doing, that people should not express
criticism of this "exclusivist" (divisive) approach that so many YECs
have taken. Let's be forthrightly honest about the situation."
"...But non-YECs have not and do not
claim that a person's belief in young earth creationism puts their
salvation in danger, or makes their faith "suspect" or
"compromising." Of course, if you think my assessment is incorrect,
please show me the discussion I haven't been following which shows
Not only have you not been following this discussion, you must not have
finished reading my posting. I have shown that non-YEC's claim that the YEC
view makes their faith suspect! I gave numerous examples. How can the
comments I cited from this very list be interpreted any other way? They
have clearly portrayed YEC's as being agents of the devil and on the road
My point was not that YEC's are innocent of the attitudes you point out,
but that many non-YEC's are guilty as well.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 03 2001 - 13:01:57 EDT