>
Hi Norm
> Woodward Norm Civ WRALC/TIEDM wrote:
>
> I am surprised that nearly everyone takes umbrage with the word “indoctrinate.” Its primary definition in Webster’s Ninth is “to instruct, esp. in fundamentals or rudiments: TEACH.” And, a relatively old earth is one of the fundamentals taught in most modern science courses.
Sadly, the word "indoctrinate" has lost its original meaning and now means something quite different. Rather like "gay" in fact. The current use is far more unsavoury. The way you used it seems to me far more aligned with the original.
The discovery of the immense age of the earth is one of the most far reaching discoveries of earth history. It deserves a place amongst the taught fundamental of science.
>
> But everyone seems to miss my original point…a statistic was posted that 99% of today’s scientists are more willing to accept a flat earth rather than a young earth, and it would seem to me that that should cause some to consider the secondary meaning of the word, also.
If a Christian rejects the antiquity of the earth because of their reading of the Bible then they they might as well be consistent and reject the evidence for the sphericity of the earth for exactly the same reason.
>
> Speaking of stats: there seems to be a question on how many YECs would not accept an OE evolutionist as a Christian. I suspect that it would be about as many as there are evolutionists who would not accept a creationist as a scientist.
>
I would see this as a false antithesis. Evolution is not the alternative to creation. God is creator and has created using evolution.
Jon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 13 2002 - 16:16:08 EST