> With respect to taking quotes out of context, try any standard YEC book
> references: Whitcomb and Morris "The Genesis Flood", John Morris "The
> Earth", Roth "Origins". I have gone through all or some of these books
> mis-citation seems the norm, not the exception. I am supply specific
> if needed.
> Jon's statement is entirely fair . I first read Gen Flud in 19971 at
L'Abri under schaeffer. It did not take long to realise that the argument
depends on mis-citation and that explains why YEC is such a hard nut to
crack. Many Christians simply cannot believe that devout Christians could do
such a dishonest thing and one is made to feel a cad for suggesting it. So
YEC becomes almost irrefutable. The question is - Is this mis-citation
deliberate or is it because they dont know what they are talking about.?
Many will consider this inflammatory but 30years of reading YEC literature
has convinced me it is one or the other. This is why I will seperate ID from
YEC, the arguments of Behe Dembski and others have an integrity about them
which does not send my blood pressure rising. However if ID wishes to be
heard it must seperate itself from YEC as if they go to bed with YEC they
will lose their virginity.
Yet why is YEC so readily swallowed?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 08 2001 - 16:48:19 EDT