Re: [asa] AIG's weakly message

From: Merv <>
Date: Sat Feb 10 2007 - 19:08:59 EST

And that is a fair observation as well. My reply was a bit flippant,
and an example of making a straw man out of the other side. Not that
the clarification below hasn't received good answers: (we brought up
before the difficulties of insisting that the "death" only refer to
physical death). But YECism will have an answer for that too, and on
it goes. I'm not familiar with Whorton's work, but it sounds worthy.


John Walley wrote:
> Good point but the difference is that the YEC's will say all the
> death and suffering that was used in the Bible was ushered in through
> man's sin and therefore not God's ideal plan, as opposed to the "death
> before the fall" which apparently was, and is therefore the key
> hang-up for the YEC's. I have spoken to many YEC's who have admitted
> to me that if pressed, they could accept an old earth if they had too,
> but death before the fall is the showstopper and therefore their
> litmus test for orthodoxy.
> Fortunately, I was really never that familiar with the details of
> YECism to appreciate this nuance but I really had my eyes opened to
> this after reading "Peril in Paradise" by Mark Whorton of
> <>. He is a former YEC and
> unpacks all the theological baggage of YECism and takes on what
> exactly is meant by a creation that was "very good" and how they over
> interpret that to mean "perfect".
> John
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* []
> *On Behalf Of *Merv
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 10, 2007 1:33 PM
> *To:* Carol or John Burgeson;
> *Subject:* Re: [asa] AIG's weakly message
>> What happened to Templeton is a warning for us all today. He went to
>> Princeton University and was taught to believe in the evolutionary
>> teaching of "millions of years." He recognized that if this were
>> true, then God used death, bloodshed, suffering and disease for
>> millions of years as part of His creative process---and then called
>> this very good.
>> All through his book, Templeton wrote that there can't be a God of
>> love because of all the death and suffering in the world. The
>> teaching of "millions of years" destroyed Templeton. Don't
>> compromise, as he did, and destroy your faith.
> "Weakly" message? --- shame on you, John, you couldn't resist could
> you? :-)
> Regarding the complaint about a God of love causing death and
> suffering, Christians who read their Bibles didn't need evolution to
> introduce us to that discomfort. The Old Testament is full of it.
> Anyone finds a God who presides over calamity to be unconscionable had
> better refrain from reading their Bibles. Doesn't mean we have a
> good answer for it except to dismissively assert that God is sovereign
> --- just means anyone who gets shook up over this "new" challenge
> from science apparently hasn't adequately withstood the shaking from
> within their own faith.
> --merv

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Feb 10 19:03:56 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Feb 10 2007 - 19:03:56 EST