Michael Roberts wrote:
>The clever ploy was to downplay Evolution and not insist on its teaching
nor
>that on the age of the earth. Teachers under pressure to complete the
syllabus
>could simply leave them out and thus another generation would not know the
>scientific arguments for the vast age of the earth and make them easy prey
for
>YEC as if people cannot grasp the arguments they will swallow the
pseudoscience
>of Creationism. Further it is one thing to criticise evolution but it is
another
>to use faulty critiques such as Gish or Jon wells which students would not
be
>able to see through.
I am not sure that is why people become YECs. I knew the arguments for an
old earth before I became a YEC. I became a YEC because my religious
beliefs required it. The reasoning is that if God's word says this
happened, and if we trust God, then we should believe what is written. Same
reasoning goes to many other parts of the Bible such as, God's word says
that Jesus arose, If I trust God, then I should believe that. The
parallelism of this type of argument is why YEC arguments have force in
Christianity. It is not merely a matter of knowledge. I know lots of YECs
who know the arguments for an ancient earth--indeed, Allen knows them
also--e.g. light from distant stars.
And I might add that this misunderstanding is why so often our arguments
fail to reach their target.
glenn
see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
for lots of creation/evolution information
anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 04 2002 - 22:24:34 EST