Re: AIG says it like it is

From: <>
Date: Wed Feb 08 2006 - 11:54:54 EST

David wrote:

> Obviously, the Green Slug hypo is supposed to illustrate that "science"
> falisfies the Christian religion. That is only the case, however, if your
> understanding of Christian doctrine and theology is so impoverished that only a
> YEC-like reading of Genesis is permitted and the entire doctrinal structure of
> the faith rests on that one reading of that one text. You don't think that's
> the case, do you Pim?

Actually, Glenn would have other reasons. He is a recovering YEC
who is struggling to find a way to harmonize the scripture with science.

I think the challenge is more fundamental than Glenn sees it. ASA
is largely made up of intellectuals. This, I think, makes our struggle
much different from people who really don't care about intellectual
matters. That we find ourselves embarrassed by the activities and
views of creationists is not really what many people consider
important. For kids who grow up and become businessmen,
company presidents, bureaucrats, and even lawyers and many types
of engineers, whether the earth is 6000 years old or 6 billion seems
almost completely irrelevant. So if your friends are YECs, it makes
perfect sense to be one yourself. Such people wouldn't understand
the issue well enough anyway, and at some point, we all have to
take information on authority anyway. AiG appears to know what it's
talking about, and there are atheists who use evolution as a platform
for their faith, so why should a businessman, engineer, lawyer, or a
company president bother to look more deeply into the matter?

So the first thing is that intellectuals are in the minority. Perhaps
this has always the case . St. Augustine wrestled with it, and
we also.

But there is another matter that comes with being an intellectual.
We think before we do, and we know we can be wrong. When one
__knows__ the truth, it is easy to fly planes into buildings without ever
asking questions. Even if you find an intellectual in a God-serving
sacrificial ministry, they were probably more like Jonah in landing on
it. And that wishy-washy bit. That wishy-washy stuff just doesn't
go over as a man trusting in God. At best, we'd come across as
Gidean. So long before the issue of science in detail shows up on
the radar screen, the question of our salvation is clearly on the

I don't know what we really can do, in fact. Probably the best we
can do is have a solid ministry, actively participate within the
church, and be an important member. In that way, we may have
some ability to tame the folly that goes on. At least as long as
you're a member, you can change people's attitudes to some extent.
If you pick up and leave, it will surely not change.

The other thing is know that bible and really pray to, and trust in, God.

These are all things that take time and grace, and human effort has limited
effectiveness. Our salvation is already suspect in their minds. To an
audience, these debates amount to little more than two propagandists,
and so they will simply side with the one who they are already more in
favor of, no matter what proofs might be provided to the contrary.

by Grace we proceed,
Received on Wed Feb 8 11:57:57 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Feb 08 2006 - 11:57:57 EST