Re: have we forgotten who the enemy is?

Glenn clearly wants me to respond, so I will.
1. I know paradigms were present by T Kuhn in his classic but badly flawed
book on Scientific revolutions (He was basically wrong over the Lyellian
revolution and offbeam on Darwin) Following him for the sake of argument (I
reckon paradigms are grossly overworked) a paradigm has to be a coherent
scientific one (or even an incoherent one like YEC).
2. During the 18 -19 century there was a changing geological paradigm -
there were in my view no major revolutions.
3. For Glenn to say the prevailing paradigm of laity was YEC begs many
questions. Most laity never put pen to paper and we have very little record
what they wrote. However it is probable that most understood no science but
thought the earth was created in 6 days. I call that default literalism out
of ignorance. Many today are like wise.
4 when we look at the educated laity the majority in the 19th century were
in fact old earthers, and they produced much popular literature - consider
the publications of the UK Religious Tract society so wonderfully chronicled
in Science and Salvation by Aileen Fyfe (Univ Chicago Press 2004)
5 There were of course some YE types especially those described by Mortenson
in his wonderfully inept Ph. D. However they were a small minority and by
1850s were almost extinct.
6 in the USA we see YEC exhibited by the Lord brothers and Ellen White et al
of the SDA, some Southern Presbys like Dabney
7 From Glenn's list he includes all who accepted that humans were only
created in 4000BC or so as YECs . That was a common view til 1860 and then
became the preserve of conservative Christians - see Bow van Riper Man
among the Mammoths (Univ chicago Press 1994)
7 Wilson's book God's Funeral is a load of tripe and useless on science and
religion. It is a good atheistic tract.
8. In your list you give many of those 6day types I have cited at various
times but on other you dont always distinguish between these who thought
creation took place in 4000BC or only the creation of humans,

Hope this will do

Michael

Glenn you will receive some attachments!!!
> > My impression is that the leading paradigm in both sciences
> > and the arts, is
> > anti-Christian specifically, and the reason for that is not YEC.
> >
> > Apparently you and many others think I am wrong, I hope that
> > is the case.
>
> Yes, I think you are wrong. If you go back to when geology and other
> sciences were developing, in the late 18th and early 19th century, you
> will find that the prevailing paradigm among church laiety was YEC (I
> know Michael Roberts will disagree--my defense of this is at
> http://home.entouch.net/dmd/nineteenth.htm) . Given that, when the data
> over and over again contradicted the YEC view, but the YECs didn't
> change, scientists begain to reject the Bible. I would recommend a book
> called God's Funeral for a discussion of how Victorian society gave up
> on God. Much of that rejection was due to the commonly held
> interpretations of the Bible were factually false. The modern YECs are
> merely a hold over from that crowd. They haven't had a new or novel
> thought in about 200 years.
>
>
>
Received on Sat Feb 19 17:29:08 2005