on 1/6/01 3:09 AM, M.B.Roberts at topper@robertschirk.u-net.com wrote:
>
> Can anyone explain to me why creationsits are not willing to listen to the
> clear arguments?
>
> Jack Haas' project is absolutely essential but will have an uphill struggle
> against invincible ignorance and perjorative definitions like "evolutionary
> geology".
>
> I became a Christian a month before graduating in geology at Oxford
> University in 1968 through the IVF. If I had been confronted by Creationsim
> I would have rejected the claims of Christ.
>
> Michael Roberts
Michael, my response to Haas' Lay Education Project suggests the root cause
of the unwillingness of YECs to respond to attacks. I repeat what I said
here because I'm not sure that my original mail to asa@calvin.edu went
through. I saw no responses.
Repeat of comment on a Lay Education Project:
I agree with Emmett's thinking. A scientific confrontation would not work.
The basic problem is the same one that we all have. We all have been
taught to defend the faith that we usually were told. The flaw is the
attitude that everyone else should change their worldview, because "mine" is
the correct one. We can not force acceptance of views that appear
threatening.
We need to build intentional change into all our organizations, especially
education. We need to give the student h/h rightful freedom to build h/h
own worldview without dogmatic indoctrination from either science or
religion. Of course, fair guidance will be needed. Thus, we need to rebuild
all education to teach students how to use the freedom they have to build
healthy worldviews. We need to teach each student how to build a healthy
worldview. The assumptions that a student selects must allow the building
of a coherent worldview. Periodic change to that worldview will be
necessary to maintain a consistent set of relationships. Thus, consistency
must replace conformity as a guiding criterion.
To accomplish the building of healthy worldviews, all relevant topics must
be made available to the student. This means that our current application
of separation of Church and State is a major barrier to needed intentional
change.
A new openness to discussion and sharing that is not threatening will be
needed to facilitate intentional change. Shared discussion must replace
debate and confrontation. We are each responsible to use the freedom we
have to intentionally change our selves. We all are on journeys of faith
that need to periodically change to build a right moral society.
End of repeat
I also would add that Robert Rogland's suggestion that an independent
project from ASA would be the best line of persuasion rather than attack.
The problem is much deeper than resolving a difference of opinion.
Jim Stark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 06 2001 - 09:37:25 EST