RE: [asa] Anti-Creationism Lecture

From: John Walley <john_walley@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed Dec 17 2008 - 18:16:24 EST

> Maybe this is an exaggeration, but I got the impression
> that you are saying that the survival of Christianity depends on
> Christians acknowledging the truth of whatever is generally accepted
> by scientists.

No I am saying that the successful influence of Christianity depends on the specific acknowledgement of the evidences for common descent. I don't know where you get the "generally accepted by scientists" idea. That would basically mean atheism which probably wouldn't be compatible with the successful influence of Christianity.

The difference between the Copernican Revolution and now is that then people were thirsting for intellectual fulfillment that Christianity was denying them. Now people are thirsting for an excuse to embrace anti-Christian immorality and ideological and even theological fuilfillment and this is a much more serious threat.

And I wasn't referring to Dawkins as "the enemy". I was using the term as Jesus did.

Thanks

John

--- On Mon, 12/15/08, gordon brown <Gordon.Brown@Colorado.EDU> wrote:

> From: gordon brown <Gordon.Brown@Colorado.EDU>
> Subject: RE: [asa] Anti-Creationism Lecture
> To: asa@calvin.edu
> Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 1:21 PM
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, john_walley@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Dick,
> >
> > Thanks for this poignant and thoughtful observation.
> That really puts this holiday season in perspective by
> reminding me just how much I have to be thankful for and how
> valuable the true meaning of Christmas really is.
> >
> > It is true that the world has rejected what they need
> most but in part it is because we have forced them to by
> allowing the YEC mafia to take over the evangelical church
> and drive this wedge into them between science and faith.
> The assurance of evolution being true and creationism being
> false is the only hope that most of these in the world with
> any educaton have. At least that is something that their
> instinctive spiritual discernment abilities have led them
> to.
> >
> > But it is without joy for them because they perceive
> that their options are only either/or and don't know
> that they can still hold on to their intellectual truths and
> still be an intellectually fulfilled Christian at the same
> time. This is what we have to fix by presenting a gospel to
> them that is consistent with the truths that has already
> been revealed to them instead of at war with them.
> >
> > We need more like McGrath and Collins and miller who
> risk their repuatation and career to take a bold stand with
> their faith to help reach these disenfrancised
> intellectuals. And we need honest and smart evangelical
> churches where these new converts can find a spiritual home
> and where the dangers of strict concordant literalism is
> guarded against and repudiated.
> >
> > In short, it is coming down to TE'ers to save
> Christianity. I know this sounds delusional but I think an
> integrated science/faith worldview is going to be central to
> the next wave of Christian revival simply because that is
> the battleground that the enemy has chosen to discredit
> Christianity on and therefore the new standard that God is
> raising up. Once we cleanse the household of faith of all
> our spiritual pride and self-righteousness and idolatry,
> then we will be in a position to call out Dawkins on his
> own.
> >
> > I am optimistic to hear of new political leaders that
> claim Christian faith outside of the traditional confines of
> these backward beliefs.
> > In order for us ever to be effective against Dawkins
> and his ilk, we are going to have to switch our game up on
> them a little bit. The status quo is too easy to discredit
> and dismiss. I pray with you that together we can help
> affect this much needed change.
> >
> > And happy holidays!
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > John
> >
>
> Maybe this is an exaggeration, but I got the impression
> that you are
> saying that the survival of Christianity depends on
> Christians
> acknowledging the truth of whatever is generally accepted
> by scientists.
> We on this list do have a real concern about the effect
> that acceptance of
> bad science by many believers has in forming a stereotype
> that
> nonbelievers have of Christianity, but I think this is far
> from being the
> only front in our struggle with the world, and I
> wouldn't necessarily
> elevate Dawkins to the top spot on Christianity's
> enemies list. The
> Copernican revolution had a negative effect on the popular
> impression of
> Christianity, but it didn't destroy Christianity or
> belief in the
> inspiration and authority of the Bible.
>
> Gordon Brown (ASA member)
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to 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 Wed Dec 17 18:16:42 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Dec 17 2008 - 18:16:42 EST