Hi, John.
I started my website almost exactly 2 years ago. One of the first pages
was my Links Page,
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/7755/links.html
and the very first version of that page had a link to the ASA website on
it. I have used dozens of links to sites like the ASA website for the
very purpose of demonstrating to the many Christians who don't realize
it that the portrayal by many Christians of discussion about creationism
and evolution as "Christians (meaning young earth creationists) versus
atheistic conspiracy" is simply not a correct portrayal of the true
situation. The ASA website (the home page, and links to a specific
article or two) has always figured prominently on my Links Page.
Henry Morris was an ASA member way back around the time it first
started. He left because he couldn't handle the serious criticism of his
ideas. The ASA has not taken an official position; which means, in turn,
that young earth creationism is not the official position of the
organization; which means consideration of other positions, and
criticism of YEC is allowed. This sets the ASA apart from other
"conservative" Christian organizations. Try criticizing YEC in the ICR
and open advocating something like antiquity in your local congregation,
then stand back and watch the fireworks!
Another correspondent mentioned the stats and gave a dire prognosis. My
opinion is just the opposite. I believe that, the (last) decline of
young earth creationism has already begun, and that after this decline
YEC will be considered as geocentrism is now. A permanent result of this
change will be that many of the hermeneutical considerations that are
being worked on now, appropriate to the realization of the nature of the
real world with respect to antiquity, and to biological processes, will
become just another part of the typical "cultural milieu" of evangelical
Christians - just as hermeneutical changes with regard to the
geocentrism are now taken totally for granted. I see this, because of at
least three different observations:
(1) In denominations where anything other than YEC used to be anathema,
official governing bodies are considering this specific issue, and are
taking official positions of toleration of non-YEC views. Granted, there
is still the "working out" of the internal strife that is going on,
where, for example, particular congregations of the Christian Reformed
Church has split over this issue (while this issue was actually part of
a "plate" of other issues as well, such as women preachers). As you may
be aware, Howard J. Van Till, a (now retired) professor at
CRC-affiliated Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, met much
public expression of criticism by YECs in the CRC over this issue, years
ago. The situation today is substantially different, and this change is
going on in other denominations as well.
I myself was raised in the Church Of Christ. (Also, my father was a
minister of the COC until his retirement from the ministry in 1990.)
Even the very conservative COC now has substantial toleration of
non-YEC views and criticism of YEC positions. Again, there still remains
a significant contingent of COC preachers and other members expressing
"exclusivism" on this issue (they preach that Christians who do not
believe young earth creationism are not pleasing to God, and that anyone
who publicly criticizes YEC is a "false teacher" who is to be publicly
condemned as such), but their influence has greatly diminished since
20 and 30 years ago. I can report to you that among the general COC
membership, there are a great many for whom the YEC issue is merely
passe.
(2) Others have pointed this out already, that due to whatever
historical contingents of our cultural evolution that made YEC such a
strong temptation to so many, its great popularity has been a mostly
U.S. phenomenon. It was a reaction against some post-World War II
social threads (not the least, I believe, which was some of the rampant
political socialism and flirtation with communism among some
"liberals"), and evolution and everything associated with it (geology,
astronomy, anything at all) was seen as part of this mixture of evil.
And this was despite the fact that many of the "fathers" of evangelical
Christianity had long since "made peace" with antiquity and had also
proceeded substantially, along with non-evangelicals, toward "making
peace" with the idea of biological evolution. What was part of a
reaction took on its own power in its way of thinking and looking at
theology (God's Word is Truth; scientific theories about the world
are merely the "fallible wisdom of man"). To look at things in a more
complex way simply became a part of the problem rather than a more
accurate way to look at things. (Why would God make His Word too
difficult for people to understand in a straightforward manner?)
(3) The rise of the internet has seen a great increase in the ease by
which relevant information can be accessed. Granted, there is also a
great amount of bad information that can be accessed, but, really, this
is no change in what existed before, it's just that the internet has
made all information easier to access. It was pointed out that YECs
"outgun" non-YEC sites on the web, but I disagree. While of sites that
specifically discuss creationism issues, sites with a YEC orientation
predominate, we can certainly say that of sites that cover information
relevant to creationism, YEC is quite dwarfed. For example, we wouldn't
consider The Hubble Space Telescope site
to be a creationism-related website. However, the site clearly contains
information relevant to creationism issues, and that information clearly
contradicts YEC, with respect to the antiquity issue - and it is the
antiquity issue alone that blows YEC-based theology and hermeneutics out
of the water.
There are other miscellaneous observations, such as, for example, the
YEC claim, made for at least a few decades now that evolution (and by
extension, antiquity) is "about to overthrown" by some kind of
revolution in science. I don't know what time-scale YECs have
specifically had in mind on that one, but George McCready Price was
making that claim, and the claim has been used quite steadily since
then. (For example, it was used, with no apparent embarrassment, by Paul
Nelson and John Mark Reynolds in *Three Views on Creation and Evolution*
just a couple of years ago.) I hate to be the one to break the "news,"
but the "revolution" is going the other way, and it's occurring in the
conservative Christian community!
Truth cannot contradict truth. And that's something that the controversy
over young earth creationism cannot change. SN1987A sits there, a direct
observation of an event that occurred about 168,000 years in the past.
http://oposite.stsci.edu/pubinfo/novaesupernovae.html
"SN1987A and The Antiquity of the Universe"
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/7755/essays.html
This kind of direct observational material is kind of hard to dispute.
Indeed, all YECs have ever offered in trying to explicate their position
in the face of these kinds of observations is: (1) their own human
speculation, very pure, completely unadulterated by any substantiating
empirical information, or (2) almost the entire universe is a truly
cosmic illusion (a la Gosse, the "apparent age" concept). Of course,
since neither of these positions is stated anywhere in the Bible, young
earth creationists have thereby demonstrated the inherent fallacy of
their own philosophical position.
Now, look at that, John. I got all that just from talking about my
placing a link to ASA's site on my Links Page a couple of years ago!
Keep up the good work!
Regards,
Todd S. Greene
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/7755/
###### John Burgeson, 4/2/01 17:57 EDT ######
[snip]
The placing of a link on the web sites of ASA members pointing to the
ASA web site. (I've done this; have you?)
[snip]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 22:58:43 EDT