Re: [asa] ICR for May, 2007

From: Jim Armstrong <jarmstro@qwest.net>
Date: Fri May 11 2007 - 13:29:53 EDT

But George, the age business is a linchpin in the evolution argument. If
an old age is accepted, then the (synthetic) differentiation between
micro and macro-evolution essentially goes away. JimA

George Murphy wrote:

> I think the time has come to ask if ASA can continue to remain silent
> on the age issue. This is merely an academic discussion, as shown by
> the upcoming opening of the AiG museum. We really have to ask if
> the organization is acting in a responsible way if it allows such
> blatant, well-financed & well-publicized activities to mislead people
> and give Christianity a bad name among the scientifically literate
> without speaking out.
>
> It is very important to realize that official acceptance of an old
> earth would not mean taking a official stance on biological evolution.
>
> A good deal has been made of the fact that there are a few
> scientifically trained YECs who are honest about the fact that
> present-day science points to an old earth but who themselves believe
> in a young earth because of their theological position. It might be
> unfortunate if they had to leave ASA because of the organization
> taking an old-earth position but that may be the prcise for
> organizational integrity and credibility. & there have always
> been intelligent fellow Christians who didn't meet the criteria for
> membership.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/ <http://web.raex.com/%7Egmurphy/>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Wallace" <wdwllace@sympatico.ca
> <mailto:wdwllace@sympatico.ca>>
> Cc: <asa@calvin.edu <mailto:asa@calvin.edu>>
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 5:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [asa] ICR for May, 2007
>
> > Michael Roberts wrote:
> >> George this is a totally fair response. I am still waiting for any YEC
> >> arguments who are not nonsense or a total ignoring of the evidence .
> >> Having read Genesis Flood in 1971 I have been waiting a long time.
> >>
> >> Yet I am not supposed to say all this.
> >
> > From ASA web site:
> >
> > ASA's unique mission is to integrate, communicate, and facilitate
> > properly researched science and biblical theology in service to the
> > Church and the scientific community.
> >
> > As an organization, the ASA does not take a position when there is
> > honest disagreement between Christians on an issue...
> >
> > ===============
> > At this point in history I have real problems seeing how ASA can manage
> > to resolve the tensions between the two above statements wrt YEC. There
> > does not seem to be any way, in general, that an article dealing with
> > science from a YEC perspective could be considered to be properly
> > researched and have integrity. Sure a person holding the YEC position
> > could well author a paper on an unrelated part of science or theology
> > and I for one would not want to exclude such.
> >
> > A part of me wants strongly to agree with George, John and Michael
> but I
> > also feel very conflicted as they are brothers in Christ. I definitely
> > would not want to exclude OEC or ID. If the issue ever comes up for a
> > vote, probably in the end I would opt for excluding YEC at least from
> > voting membership especially considering that they have formed their
> own
> > organizations to deal with origins.
> >
> > I think the document Terry referenced:
> > http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Evolution/commission_on_creation.html
> > is a very fair statement of the various positions and is not an
> > "embarrassment" from that point of view, however, IMHO allowing YEC
> does
> > seem to weaken ASA position and outreach with respect to integrity of
> > science.
> >
> > I only suggested a YEC ASA listserv to remain in compliance with ASAs
> > official policy, although a safe place for them to ask questions of
> > those with other positions still seems like a good idea.
> >
> > On the past Tuesday and Wednesday I took the train on my way to see my
> > dad in a nursing home in southern Ontario. When I started out the
> > countryside, in the valley of the Ottawa river was lush and farms were
> > prosperous and well kept. The valley mostly has 15 to 20 feet of clay
> > and soil on top of the rock. The train climbs to get over the Canadian
> > shield (also called the Precambrian Shield) watershed where the soil is
> > very thin on top of metamorphic base rock. One passes by lots of
> swampy
> > areas with stunted trees or shrubs. In many places the forest is dying
> > since the beavers change the drainage patterns over time. Frequently
> > hardscrabble farms are seen but with a few more prosperous farms if the
> > soil is deep and dry enough. Typically the few railway cuts, go
> through
> > hard rock although in some places eskers are obviously visible. The
> > highway follows the old settlements and thus only a little of the rough
> > swampy area is seen whereas the tracks were pushed through with much
> > less consideration for the terrain. The only explanation that seems to
> > account for the deep soil in the valley is that it was under water at
> > the end of the last ice age, which also accounts for the eskers.
> > Somehow a young earth and appearance of age does not correspond to the
> > kind of God I worship.
> >
> > Dave W
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
> <mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 11 13:29:58 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri May 11 2007 - 13:29:58 EDT