Re: How to encourage a former creationist to persevere in faith?

From: Michael Roberts <>
Date: Wed Aug 31 2005 - 16:13:27 EDT

I said disagreement scale which is very different!! Note how the scale

I think I would describe YEC as heretical, along with denying the divinity
of Christ .

I am more in tune with Bob (and George?) on this, but if Glenn gave me a
barrel of oil every time I refer people to his website I could open my own
refinery. It is a matter of dotting "i"s and crossing "t"s, but I think it a
less than good approach.


PS we are about to chop down a large tree , so will have plenty of wood for

----- Original Message -----
From: "Iain Strachan" <>
To: "Michael Roberts" <>
Cc: "Bill Hamilton" <>; "Glenn Morton"
<>; "Peter Ruest" <>;
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: How to encourage a former creationist to persevere in faith?

> On 8/31/05, Michael Roberts <> wrote:
>> I have to admit that I cannot go along with these views expressed by
>> Iain,
>> Glenn and Peter, but I cannot get worked up about it. It is about 1- 3
>> on
>> the Richter scale of disagreement- YEC is 9 or 10!!
> Well, I'm glad to know I'm down to 1-3 on the heretic scale!! Just
> don't mention the numerics. (I did once but I think I got away with it
> ;-)
>> I think it downplays the literary and theological nature of Genesis
>> which
>> is to express THAT God is Creator and puts it in a specific style.
> Actually I think there are clear literary elements as well. The
> "evening and morning" before the sun is created seem to indicate that
> this is a literary device. I wasn't saying it WAS "God's
> specification document", e.g. EARTH/1/1/BC/4004 stored somewhere on
> God's Great Computer. I said it was "a kind of" specification. It
> tells us that God planned and designed the heavens and the earth and
> the things they would have in them.
> I see Gen
>> One much more as a hymn to the Creator rather than anything else and
>> could
>> be compared more to G M Hopkins' wonderful poem God's Grandeur than God's
>> blueprint. Iain's idea leaves me cold but it may be helpful to some.
> I am very familiar with G M Hopkins' poem "God's Grandeur" and it's
> one of my favourites also. But it's not Holy Scripture, it's just a
> poem. Just as a specification document is not Holy Scripture, it's
> just a specification document. Genesis 1 is more than either of
> these, as it is part of God's revelation of himself to us.
> I would argue that Hopkins' poem is saying that you can see God's hand
> in nature (and it also describes a fallen world, spoiled by men,
> unlike Genesis 1, which describes an unfallen "very good" nature).
> Hopkins surely has a sense of God's hand in nature when he writes:
> THE WORLD is charged with the grandeur of God.
> It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
> It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
> Crushed.
> and also ...
> And for all this, nature is never spent;
> There lives the dearest freshness deep down things;
> And though the last lights off the black West went
> Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
> Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
> World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.
> It seems to me that Hopkins is seeing God's hand in nature, despite
> the fact that man has spoiled it:
> Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
> And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
> And wears man's smudge and shares man's smell: the soil
> Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.
> By contrast, I think Gen 1 is not saying "isn't nature wonderful - you
> can see God in it" , but it's saying "here is Nature. God made it.
> This is how He intended it to be".
> In short, Hopkins poem is one man's emotional and praising response to
> Creation, which draws him into worship of the Creator. Gen 1 tells
> you from the start, without the emotive response, that there IS a
> Creator.
> Iain
>> To me it is trying to get some kind of scientific ratification from
>> Genesis
>> rather than seeing that its purpose was to convince the Hebrews that the
>> one
>> God is the only Creator to a pre-scientific culture.
>> To be gently controversial I can see why this appeals to some who have
>> been
>> YEC in the past. However I do think we are closer than may seem
>> Michael
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Bill Hamilton
>> To: Glenn Morton ; 'Iain Strachan' ; 'Peter Ruest'
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 4:50 PM
>> Subject: RE: How to encourage a former creationist to persevere in faith?
>> I have also been advocating this view for some time, and share your
>> frustration. This view fits very well with the view that God commands and
>> various agencies -- perhaps the earth itself (see Gen 1:11 and other
>> similar
>> verses in Gen 1) -- execute the commands. See also Psalm 19:1-4. God
>> speaks,
>> nature executes.
>> Glenn Morton <> wrote:
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From:
>> > [] On Behalf Of Iain Strachan
>> > Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 6:17 PM
>> > As a software engineer, I tend to see Gen 1 as a kind of
>> > requirements document for the functioning system. "Let there
>> > be" seems like a set of specifications. I might design a
>> > piece of software with many different components & specify in
>> > a design document that there shall be a module that displays
>> > a graph of the data on a screen. The point at which I
>> > actually "create" or write the software that does this, is
>> > not necessarily in the same order as the various components
>> > appear in the design document. So Gen 1: is perhaps a
>> > blueprint for a "very good" creation.
>> I have been advocating this view point for about 10 years. It is sad that
>> no one ever seems to hear of this view. See
>> Bill Hamilton
>> William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
>> 586.986.1474 (work) 248.652.4148 (home) 248.303.8651 (mobile)
>> "...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31
>> ________________________________
>> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
> --
> -----------
> There are 3 types of people in the world.
> Those who can count and those who can't.
> -----------
Received on Wed Aug 31 16:21:37 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 31 2005 - 16:21:37 EDT