I regard the Bible as a body of revealed truth, too, Vernon. I also
regard Nature as a body of revealed truth, discoverable by the God-given
activity of science.Both books, rightly interpreted, reveal Gods truth.To be
a YEC, you must believe that God is telling the literal truth in one book
and lying the other. For example, a YEC interpretation of Genesis says that
the earth is less than 10, 00 years old. The book of nature, read by
science, says that's wrong.So the book of nature must be a lie. I refuse to
believe that God is lying in either book.Rather, the YEC interpretation must
You can call that following the word of man if you want, Vernon.I will
take comfort in the fact that at least I am not making God out to be a liar.
More reasonable, and far safer in my view, to accept God's Word as it has
come down to us; certainly more assuring, and far less complicated!
I agree its less complicated.The YEC stance is simple, and assuring.Like
most simple, assuring answers to complicated questions, however, it is
wrong. Too bad.
From: Vernon Jenkins [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 6:49 PM
To: Shuan Rose
Subject: Re: In Defence of my beliefs.doc
I go along with your view that there are essentially 'two kinds of
Christian'. Here are my observations on the core of the divide:
Category A :- Those who accept the divine strictures concerning man and,
accepting their helplessness, regard the Bible as a body of revealed truth -
therefore taking its contents seriously, in particular, its warnings
regarding unbelief (eg Lk.16:19-31; 2Pe.3:16,17). For them, the undermining
of the Scriptures by the claims of the scientist is seen as but one
inevitable consequence of man's essential nature; they respond by 'putting
on the whole armour of God' (Eph.6:11-18) - which includes 'the sword of the
Spirit, which is the word of God'. In this manner they exercise true reason
and are thereby enabled to distinguish between 'fact' and 'contention'.
Category B :- Those who blatantly disregard, (a) the foundational
information that God has imparted concerning man, (b) the scriptural
warnings in regard to unbelief, and (c) the possibility that events in this
world might rest on supernatural (hence, unpredictable) considerations (eg
1Sam.18:10,11; 1Ki.22). Joining forces with the materialists, they prefer to
follow the word of man rather than the Word of God, and thus having in their
own minds broken that 'which shall stand forever' (Is.40:8), pick up and
assemble those pieces that take their fancy.
Like your YEC friends, I am unashamedly a 'Category A' man who regards the
'scoring of points' in this life as having little eternal merit. More
reasonable, and far safer in my view, to accept God's Word as it has come
down to us; certainly more assuring, and far less complicated!
Sincerely, and with regards,
Shuan Rose wrote:
I sent this to a couple of YEC brothers who doubted my faith because I
them I believed in evolution and rejected a literal interpretation of
Genesis 1-11.Below is my response. I included some excerpts from Mike,
and Terry to illustrate my points
Because of my belief in evolution and my rejection of a literalistic
interpretation of Genesis, some have questioned whether I am a
The implication is that I am a skeptic, a heretic, or someone who is
searching for God.
For the record, I am a Christian who affirms the Apostles and Nicene
and that God in Christ through the Holy Spirit has come to save Man.
However, there are in my opinion two kinds of Christian. There is the
who pretends that the last 200 years of scientific and historical
investigation did not happen and that modern science poses no problems
literalistic interpretation of the Bible. Such people are quite happy to
accept and even use astronomy and physics, -when it shows that the
must have had a beginning-but not where it shows that the earth is very
and part of an older universe. They accept geology, when geologists find
oil that they can put into their cars. But they reject it when
use the same techniques to show that the earth is 4.6 billion years old
that life appeared on earth in stages and not all at once 6,000 years
They accept biology, when it creates new crops and medicines and sends
criminals to jail through DNA evidence. But they reject biology when
biologists use the same analysis to show that modern forms of life
from earlier forms of life and that in particular, humans and modern
share a common ancestor.
I believe that such a Christian is best deluded and at worst a
One cannot simply accept the parts of modern science that he or she
and reject the rest, simply because it conflicts with your
the Bible. This attitude may win acceptance among like-minded
But the outside world will think that you are living in a fool's
and will think you no different from the person who asserts that the
is flat and immovable on the basis of Ps 96:10 and Isa. 11:12.
The second Christian understands that modern science has come to
about the physical world that make a simple, literal interpretation of
Genesis 1-11 impossible, and understands that new interpretations are
necessary, just as in the sixteenth century when it became clear through
science that the earth revolved around the sun and that Gen. 11:7, Josh.
10:13, Eccl. 5:1, and other passages could not be interpreted literally,
indeed they were before Copernicus and Galileo. The ASA list serv is one
group where Christian scientists and nonscientists are trying to work
such a new interpretation. Unfortunately, the first type of Christian
continually accused quite a few of them of apostasy and worse. I would
that you consider the evidence and join the dialogue and help us on the
serv work on these problems before rendering judgment.
Her are few excerpts from this dialogue that express the point more
than I have.
(Good Stuff snipped)
These are not atheists or scoffers, but sincere, Bible believing
who are truly concerned with wrestling with a difficult problem.
If this be skepticism or heresy, let there be more of it. We honor the
of truth by dealing with it, not covering it up or by preferring the
that comfort us.
Shuan Rose, Attorney at Law
2632 N Charles Street, Baltimore MD 21218
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 02 2002 - 23:39:39 EDT