Randy wrote:
Dick/George,
Neither position papers nor
the exclusion of people from ASA seem appropriate to me. We do need
to enable, empower, and encourage our members to speak out. We need
to continue to find effective ways of doing that. Isn't there a
middle ground between individuals being on their own and an organization
being of one single frame of mind?
I think you would have to formalize it some way. The only way I can
think of is to expand the statement of faith to include what we don't
have faith in, or to define our view of science that excludes certain
pseudoscientific endeavors in the Bible-science debate. It would
certainly be controversial, and we will all be squashed in the process,
however, the publicity would probably be beneficial in the wrong
run. So if you want to run it up the flagpole ...
You could add a fifth article (or more) to the statement of faith.
We could probably generate something and then present it for approval and
get shot down for trying, but who knows, the endeavor could be worthy of
the effort. I have probably been one of the most vocal in
opposition to YEC, the
article
in Perspectives, "Young-Earth Creationism: A Literal Mistake" is on our website.
So I'll suggest something and then you all can flail away at it.
5. We applaud the honest efforts of conscientious scientists who have strived to solve origins of life problems and have contributed positively to the Bible-science debate. We feel compelled to reject the misguided efforts of certain groups and individuals who have placed a strain on Bible credibility by resorting to pseudo science and what could best be called "biblical distortionism." We specifically reject the notions of 24-hour days of creation, and flood catastrophist models of creation as repugnant both to genuine science and sound Bible hermeneutics.
There's my two cents.
Dick Fischer -
Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Mon Feb 14 12:11:01 2005