Re: RATE Vol. II

Dick Fisher wrote,

> Is that it? Is another shoe going to drop here?

And George Murphy wrote:

> If we're gong to "take a stand against the dishonesty of representing that
> science has shown the validity of a young earth when, in fact, the opposite
> is true" then we have to be able to say that the opposite IS true. ASA is
> the only organization that has the potential to counter young-earth claims
> among the people who believe them &/or are likely to be convinced by them.
> If we say "We insist on integrity in science" the RATE people will fall all
> over themselves to agree & we will have accomplished nothing. There are
> times to be subtle & pussyfoot & times to be utterly blunt & this is one of
> the latter cases.
>

Need I say that we need to pray about this.

Something does need to be said about a "science held captive".
Actually, that the book (by the same name) provided long
preceding examples of creationist arguments but in addition,
it has examples of scientism with similar arguments as Dawkins
Now that I reflect on it, I start to recognize that the
"theological" arguments of scientism based atheism are
almost as old as the creationist views and probably just as
questionable.

So ASA is in a good position to speak against this kind
of distortion of science. At minimum, we should clearly
distance ourselves from young earth creationist position,
or we will be basically doing what ID is doing (with their
"big tent" policy).

If ASA decides to stand up, I'm with you on this.
But I reckon it will not be easy, especially because
we have that added obligation to follow Christ, and it
is something that needs some serious planning (and
honest prayer). The commitment here is for Christ
first, and everything else is second. The road of folly
is wide, so I cannot emphasize enough to whom we
must be seeking for answers.

Hmm. I think I should add
by Grace and Mercy we proceed,
Wayne
Received on Sun May 21 20:40:50 2006