Re: YEC and loss of faith

From: george murphy (
Date: Tue Feb 12 2002 - 07:47:51 EST

  • Next message: John W Burgeson: "Re: Griffin book"

    Walter Hicks wrote:

    > george murphy wrote:


    > > & finally, my point stands that there is no good argument for YEC beyond that
    > > based on its dubious assumptions about the character of biblical narratives.
    > I once heard a viewpoint that says that God created the Universe with
    > man in mind. In fact: that by the Gospel of John this is conveyed very
    > clearly. If then the universe is created for man, is it so obvious that
    > God would have it do 20 billion years of preparation for the coming of
    > historical mankind. If that "history" is what is needed for the backdrop
    > to mankind, then so be it. Do you think that God could not just as
    > easily start the clock ticking some 10,000 years ago? Yeah, I know that
    > you probably hate the "history built in" argument. Do I perhaps see an
    > a-priori bias for "naturalism" that refuses to even consider anything
    > else?
    > I don't subscribe to YEC, but I think the arguments generally presented
    > here don't hold overwhelming weight.

            I don't think a full-blown evolutionary view of the world is a slam dunk from the
    standpoint of either science or theology. There are a number of things that current
    evolutionary theory hasn't explained well (in particular, the origin of life), and there is
    some latitude in biblical interpretation. I can understand how informed & sensible people
    can hold varieties of PC or OEC, though I think they're wrong in significant ways. But YEC
    is a quite different matter, & that's what we're talking about. It is scientifically
    worthless & theologically unnecessary.

            God didn't create the universe simply with humanity in mind but humanity indwelt by
    God - i.e., for the Incarnation. See Eph.1:10 and Col.1:15-20. This requires that there
    be an intelligent species for the Logos to enperson. & if God acts to bring about such a
    species in the world through natural processes - so that it's possible for that species to
    understand the world on its own terms - then that species will arrive via evolution. That
    takes a long time - & all the anthropic "coincidences" then become of theological
    interest. But the whole idea is not simply an anthropic but a _the_anthropic principle.
    I'll be glad to send to anyone who's interested my article "The Incarnation as a
    Theanthropic Principle" which was published in _Word & World_ a few years ago.



    George L. Murphy
    "The Science-Theology Interface"

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 12 2002 - 07:47:22 EST