Re: Re: [asa] AIG -- Scientists! Give it up!

Vernon,

I really don't know why I'm continuing here. I think we have no more to
offer each other. I've collaborated with you in the past on the numerical
analysis of Genesis 1:1 and associated verses, but I wish to do so no
longer. This is not because I don't think there is something there; I do.
It is because you are using it as a platform to promote the tragically
damaging doctrine of Young Earth Creationism, which having thought it
through and evaluated the evidence, I find I must oppose vigorously if I am
to remain honest and true.

For a while I was also fooled into thinking this was the way to go, or at
least that it was worth exploring. Now I am more convinced than ever that
it is doing terrible and tragic damage to the Christian faith and turning us
into a laughing stock. I deplore Dick's continued bully-boy language that
appears to state that the ring leaders are just in it for the money. I just
think you're all tragically deluded, and are just seeing what you want to
see. It is YEC, not evolution that may well be a Satanic deception, and
it's destroying the church.

You write:

> As you must know, the data that Collins presents - while undoubtedly
> interesting - is no _proof_ that humans and mice, for example, share a
> common ancestor; and no amount of evidence of this kind is able to overturn
> the simpler alternative that the special creation of different 'kinds' for
> life in a terrestial environment must, logically, require _similar_, but not
> _identical_, materials.
>

It's not a simpler explanation, Vernon; it is a more complex explanation -
Occam's razor implies that the simplest explanation is also the most
probable. You wish to imply that God intervened separately into creation by
going zap, zap zap creating different kinds of creatures and re-using the
same DNA code as if it were a subroutine in a computer program that got
slightly tweaked with each new environment God used it in. I've also
thought of that as an explanation myself. But at the end of the day it's
not a more simple explanation than descent from a common ancestor - it's an
explanation chosen because it's what you WANT to believe (and what I wanted
to believe as well for a time).

Of course, in his (Collins) view the evidence in favour of evolution is
> overwhelming - but in making this judgment he has ignored those significant
> items of scriptural data which I have been bringing to the attention of the
> forum over past weeks.
>

The scriptural data don't invalidate Collins's evidence - it's only your own
narrow interpretation of Scripture that gives you an excuse to ignore it.
How do you know it's not meant allegorically? When Jesus said "I am the
True Vine" he didn't mean that bunches of grapes were growing off his arms,
after all? He didn't meant that literally we were physically growing out of
his body, did he? And note that St. Augustine didn't treat the Genesis
account as literal days - even though he had no need to accomodate Darwin
who lived 15 centuries later.

I am sad to say that there is very little else I can offer you - you offer
> me a list of "bad fruits" of evolution. Well, human misconstrual of anything
> can give rise to bad fruits. What about apartheid (justified by citing
> Noah's curse on Ham), the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the hate
> rhetoric you'll find on the Wesboro Baptist Church in Kansas ( *
> www.godhatesfags.com* <http://www.godhatesfags.com/>) (example given:
> "Thank God for AIDS")?
>
> There are plenty of "bad fruits" coming out of peoples abuses of
> Chistianity as well.
>
> Iain, I have invited you to provide an example of evolution's "good
> fruits".
>

I did, and you just rubbished my serious suggestion as being "flippant".
The elegance of a creation that produces by itself (as it says in Genesis
1 "let the earth bring forth .." creatures capable of having a relationship
with the Creator, is a source of absolute wonderment and worship. I
challenged you about the immune system that fends off disease for you, using
evolution, and you just dismissed it as not being the "real thing". I've
given you ample examples, and you've just chosen to ignore them. There's
nothing more I can do.

Surely, you must agree that this doctrine is the very antithesis of the
> Lord's Gospel of Love.
>

I don't agree that it's a doctrine. It's a physical process. Also I've
noticed in the past people on the list have been irritated by your continual
use of the "surely you agree" method of argument & so am I. It's just as
arrogantly bullying as the way Dick argues, and you would do well to drop
this type of rhetoric. Listen to me. Surely I _don't_ agree. OK?

> And that is why it has been so eagerly grasped by those who wish to
> destroy the Church - and all it stands for. [A little while ago, you
> objected to my quoting the name 'Hitler' in this context. For your
> information, Richard Weikart's "From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics,
> Eugenics, and Racism in Germany", overwhelms your objection with hard
> facts.]
>

 People, and very likely Hitler and Stalin misused evolutionary theory, just
as people misuse Christianity (using the Bible to justify Apartheid etc).
Neither circumstance proves that either evolution or Christianity is a "bad
tree".

> The Lord has laid down the guidelines for righteous living; it therefore
> follows that he cannot be held responsible for the behaviour of those
> 'tares' who, under the aegis 'Christian', perpetrate the foul deeds you
> speak of.
>

And equally, when evil people use evolutionary theories to justify their
foul deeds, then evolution itself cannot be held responsible.

Are you really not able to see that, as a TE, you are attempting to serve
> two masters. The Lord himself reckons this to be impossible, predicting that
> "He will hold to the one (e.g. evolution), and despise the other (e.g. the
> Bible)".
>
I see absolutely no justification for your (e.g. evolution) insertion here.
It's not a "master", it's an observed physical process. Equally there is
no justification for (e.g. the Bible). The two masters were God and Mammon
if I recall correctly. Are you saying the Bible is God? Please do not twist
God's holy word to suit your own purposes.

I'm not going to argue any more with you on this subject. You have
effectively broken off any further possibility of collaboration between us.
I will no longer help you defend your theories as you are using them to
promote falsehood. I still maintain that there is something genuine there
in the patterns that you found (and if anyone on the list wants to join me
in an off-list discussion to evaluate the evidence, they are welcome to).
But I think you are misusing the information God has revealed to you.

Iain

PS .. this is for Dick, as I'm bowing out of this thread, thoroughly
sickened by the whole business. You and Vernon are as bad as each other.

Dick, on more than one occasion you've told us proudly of the combat
missions you flew over Vietnam, on the last case even going as far as to
enumerate them. Well, I've no doubt it was very brave and patriotic, but
rather than words, I leave the following famous picture - I still remember
vividly the day it was published in the UK papers, when I was 14. It has of
course since become iconic of the evils of war. It sums up more eloquently
than any words that I could write, what I wish to say to you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TrangBang.jpg

Iain

----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com>
> *To:* Vernon Jenkins <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net>
> *Cc:* Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net> ; ASA <asa@calvin.edu>
> *Sent:* Monday, July 24, 2006 11:56 PM
> *Subject:* [Norton AntiSpam] Re: [asa] AIG -- Scientists! Give it up!
>
> Vernon,
>
> Did you actually try to evaluate the _scientific_ evidence that Collins
> presents? If so, on what basis do you reject it. If not, then you can
> hardly complain that so few people on this list have evaluated your
> numerical findings. If you'd for once desist from your continual behaviour
> of writing darkly worded posts about how evil is the heart of men that they
> can't see a miracle when it's in front of them, thereby antagonising people
> (just as Dick is antagonising me with his hate language), then people might
> be prepared to take some notice of you.
>
> I am sad to say that there is very little else I can offer you - you offer
> me a list of "bad fruits" of evolution. Well, human misconstrual of
> anything can give rise to bad fruits. What about apartheid (justified by
> citing Noah's curse on Ham), the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the
> hate rhetoric you'll find on the Wesboro Baptist Church in Kansas (
> www.godhatesfags.com) (example given: "Thank God for AIDS")?
>
> There are plenty of "bad fruits" coming out of peoples abuses of
> Chistianity as well.
>
> You have said that evolution is a Satanic deception. I know you are
> sincere in that belief, but I think you are deluding yourself and not facing
> the evidence. It is therefore ironic that you complain that people won't
> face up to the numerical evidence you present.
>
> Have you not considered the possibility that your narrow interpretation of
> the Bible might also be a Satanic deception? Even St. Augustine in the 4th
> century didn't accept the six days as literal 24 hour periods of time.
>
> Iain
>
>
> On 7/24/06, Vernon Jenkins <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net> wrote:
> >
> > Dick,
> >
> > I've just finished reading "Faith and the Human Genome", and it strikes
> > me that what you and Francis Collins have in common is a complete disregard
> > for words spoken by the Lord in his 'Sermon on the Mount'. There he warned
> > his followers to carefully examine the teaching of any doctrine which
> > threatened to _counter_ rather than _confirm_ his gospel message. "By their
> > fruits ye shall know them." / "No man can serve two masters."
> >
> > Writing to Iain just recently, I suggested that evolution fails these
> > tests completely - backing up my claim with a selection of its
> > anti-christian 'fruits'. You attest to be 'well-educated' and a man of
> > 'relevant knowledge'. Let me therefore ask, Where do these significant
> > matters fit into your scheme of things? - for I'm sure you would agree with
> > me that the words attributed to our Lord, Saviour and Creator must carry
> > more weight than all others recorded in the J-C Scriptures.
> >
> > From what I gather, Jesus Christ was a _creationist_ - even a YEC!! (
> > Lk.16:31).
> >
> > Vernon
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > *From:* Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net>
> > *To:* ASA <asa@calvin.edu>
> > *Sent:* Monday, July 24, 2006 8:46 PM
> > *Subject:* RE: [asa] AIG -- Scientists! Give it up!
> >
> > Hi Iain, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > >>I disagree totally with your position.<<
> >
> >
> >
> > That's what we do on this list.
> >
> > >>Creationists as paid assassins??? What on earth are you talking
> > about?<<
> >
> >
> >
> > Jim Jones fed his congregation spiked Kool-Aid. They drank it and
> > died. What kind words can we say about Jim Jones? We can have pity for the
> > duped congregation, but Jones was culpable. My indignation is aimed at the
> > ring leaders who I'll leave unnamed, but one of them died recently.
> >
> > >> Yes, they're deluded, I'll agree to that. So was I but I didn't
> > allow myself to be for very long.<<
> >
> >
> >
> > I have no quarrel with those who because of lack of relevant knowledge
> > get caught up in YEC. When they get to heaven, who'll care? It's the
> > untold millions who think the Bible is incredible because YECs have sold
> > them the same bill of goods – that's who I care for. I was lucky having
> > been saved when I was in my forties, well-educated, and not so susceptible
> > to YEC propaganda. But I could have lost my new-found faith had I not
> > persevered and looked hard for better answers. Many others would have just
> > bailed out all together, I almost did.
> >
> >
> >
> > >> But I've known a close colleague who was a sincere creationist &
> > there's no way I'd call him a charlatan, or a "paid up assassin".<<
> >
> >
> >
> > Nor would I. There are probably less than a score of individuals who
> > could qualify for a custom-made millstone for their scrawny necks. But God
> > is the judge of that, not you or I.
> >
> >
> >
> > Dick Fischer
> >
> > Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association
> >
> > Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
> >
> > www.genesisproclaimed.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -----------
> After the game, the King and the pawn go back in the same box.
>
> - Italian Proverb
> -----------
>
>

-- 
-----------
After the game, the King and the pawn go back in the same box.
- Italian Proverb
-----------
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.