RE: Biblical Interpretation Reconsidered

Michael wrote:

> Behalf Of Michael Roberts
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 2:11 PM

> I agree with what George says. You cannot say that belief in a young earth
> is heretical as the bible is not unequivocal on the age of the earth
>
> BUT BUT BUT
>
> YEC is heretical for a variety of reasons;
> 1. It causes division among Christains
> 2. tends to demonise those who dont accept YEC
> 3 Uses a plethora of subchristian methods to make its case -
> misrepresentation etc etc.
> 4 Uses bad philosophical and scientific argument so that it is
> pseudo-science in the common sense of the word.
> 5 totally unwilling to listen to counter-arguments
> 6 Claims that it is the only possible interpreetation for a Christian.
>

I will add that it is a bit odd that when a YEC comes up with some theory,
and he finds that his theory contradicts data he or she must accept, they
then posit that God performed some miracle of the YEC's choosing to save the
day. When you compare these miracles between different YECs, they are
mutually incompatible. These miracles share the fact that they are not
mentioned in Scripture, so in effect they are additions to Scripture. They
also share the fact that these miracles are not mentioned in the Bible.
The ICR RATE group postulates that God miraculously changes masses of
particles, Baumgardner in the past has had God miraculously absorb heat. God
has been postulated to uplift and subside the continents, move the
continents, create the water and then destroy it.

The problem with this approach is that effectively it places God at the
whimsy of man. The YEC calls the tune and God has to perform the correct
trick for the individual YEC. Theologically, I find this troublesome.
Received on Tue Dec 23 20:47:21 2003