Re: A modest proposal

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. (
Date: Sat Sep 13 2003 - 14:13:35 EDT

  • Next message: Jan de Koning: "Re: Science Taken From the Bible (KJV)"

    On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:21:44 -0700 "Jim Armstrong" <>
    > <snip>
    > I am heartened by the number of you that are
    > addressing
    > this problem in your own churches and communities, and I see some of
    > that in my own as well.
    > I was also touched by the pamphleting that one of the list
    > participants
    > engaged in following one Creationist lecture. They found a way to do
    > something proactive.
    > And I'm really impressed with Burgy and Josh Bembenek's
    > single-handed
    > undertakings.
    > All I would like to see is a chance for people outside the Christian
    > community to know that there are other alternatives, in particular
    > to
    > know that not every Christian thinks that the matter of evolution is
    > an
    > either-or, God-or-atheism proposition with respect to Christianity.
    > [cut to the chase] An idea occurred to me which won't fix the
    > imbalance,
    > but maybe it is a gesture in the right direction. Take a look at
    > This is just a draft, but the idea is that it would be really easy
    > and
    > economical to create visibility for just the headline and URL
    > (windshield wiper spacer, insert, ad, billboard, blimp, body paint)
    > anywhere in the country. Maybe it would create enough visibility and
    > curiosity to let at least a few more folks know there are
    > alternatives
    > to the God-or-atheism choice.

    I think you're on to something. I looked at your draft and found one
    problem. TE is not day-age. Day-age is connected to OEC, as found in Hugh
    Ross from more of a science approach and Gleason Archer (not sure of that
    name) in theology. TE does not go along with bird and fish arriving
    simultaneously, with quadrupeds and man succeeding them. Or with fruiting
    trees before fish. So OEC and TE need to be distinguished.

    The other problem, which Paul and others have noted, is that day-age
    messes up the exegesis of Genesis 1 and other passages. The firmament is
    solid and the heavenly bodies are stuck onto it. The sun is at least as
    old as the earth and older than oceans. There is water above the
    firmament and below the earth. Birds fly under the firmament, so it
    cannot be the atmosphere. But this flies in the face of both YEC and OEC.

    Do you ignore these and similar problems in the interest of "peace"?
    Present the various interpretations in a second tier connected to the
    home page? Probably there are additional possibilities.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 13 2003 - 15:43:48 EDT