John writes
>I reviewed Gish's book CREATION SCIENTISTS ANSWER THEIR CRITICS...in Sept
1994
In that review he writes
>>Finally, Creation Scientists are frequently referred to as if they
constituted a significant minority of all scientists -- it is high time ICR
made an attempt to quantify that minority. My estimate, from 30 years of
study of the issues, is that such scientists are well under 1% of the whole.
Your milage may differ<<
In his book Creation and Time (1994), Hugh Ross claims that more
than 99% of America's practicing scientists view a young earth as a
more far-fetched notion than a flat earth.
By now we know that my position is prophetic narrative. To me, the
fact that there is a way to make the Bible work with science makes
trying to make the Bible work without science highly suspicious.
I dare say that as early as Darwin someone could have looked at Genesis
One. They could have seen a formless and void earth, plants,
fish/crocodiles, land animals, humans. Hmmm. Looks like evolution.
The rest may not have been clear yet. But who among us has been told
by God what the rest of our lives will be like? Faith plays a role.
I confess that for a time I was ignorant about this reading of Genesis One,
which requires a non-traditional interpretation of the age of the universe.
And I was suspicious of science. Leaving God out of creation seemed like
leaving hot out of summer.
Jim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 11 2002 - 13:12:36 EST