ASA - June 2008: RE: [asa] Creationism Conference (The Queen of

From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
Date: Wed Jun 25 2008 - 11:31:40 EDT

George Murphy said:
" We read about nature in books but we don't read nature itself. & we
read about what God has done in the history of Israel & in Jesus but
that's not the same thing as reading those events themselves. Natural &
historical phenomena are the primary things & the books are secondary."

So we agree that in that way Book 1 is like Book 2; I thought your prior
point prior was that Book 2 was different in that it couldn't be
literally read. My point was that both books are handled the same-- you
"read" one just as you "read" the other. So I guess we are in
agreement.

Gordon Brown said:
"You seem to accept Ken Ham's claim that he correctly understands Book
1."

I think Ken Ham understands Book 1 like anyone else... the difference is
he doesn't also consider Book 2 too much when formulating his theology,
as if it is a "compromise" with science..

Gordon said:
"Actually many of these science-faith issues were around long before the
advent of modern science."

Like what? If you are referring to Augustine's idea of instantaneous
creation, I think that is only because Augustine is throwing in some
Book 2 (logic and reason).

Gordon said:
"Also YEC readings of some pssages have forced

them to come up with nontraditional interpretations of other passages.
The

English translations of Genesis taken literally do indeed support a
global

flood, which is evidence that that is the traditional view. However
Hebrew

uses the same word for earth and land with land the far more common

translation. Even sometimes such as Gen. 41:57 and Gen. 8:9 (in light of

Gen. 8:5) earth doesn't really mean the entire globe even though it was

translated that way. Early church fathers such as Ambrose recognized
that

the fact that a wind caused the waters to recede presented a problem for

the flood being global."

Anyone who believes in a local flood has just as many problems as a YEC,
I think. There's still a problem of where the water came from and how
it left. I was talking to a leader at a RTB chapter last night and he
told me the RTB position was that the rain and water for the local flood
was a miraculous event. If you can flood that local large area for a
year, seems to me that you'd still have the same problems as a YEC with
a global flood... and something that major would have "left a mark"
which I don't think anyone has spotted (just like with a global flood).
Also RTB thinks all humans were local in that area so they could be
wiped-out... which sounds unreasonable to me. I'm not familiar with the
topology of the area, but I also doubt it is sufficiently bowl-shaped
(on all sides) to contain hundreds of feet of water for a year.

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of gordon brown
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 6:40 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] Creationism Conference (The Queen of Sciences)

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Dehler, Bernie wrote:

> Here are some obvious 'battles' between book 1 (God's Word) and book 2

> (God's works):

> Book 1: The first man was physically made from a pile of dust

> Book 2: There is no first physically-made "man" ... man was made from

> lower life forms (evolution)

> -> At stake here is much theology, such as the meaning of "Adam and

> Eve," the fall, nature and origin of sin, etc.

> Who wins? I say Book 2.

> Book 1: There was a worldwide flood

> Book 2: There was no worldwide flood

> Who wins? I say Book 2.

> Ken Ham says to either ignore Book 2 or else refuse to see the
testimony

> of Book 2. His theology comes solely for Book 1. That's why he is
too

> extreme for most of us. Most of us try to reconcile Book 1 and Book
2.

> If you want to know what theology is like if you ignore Book 2, that
is

> YEC'ism (although they do accept some Book 2 things like

> heliocentricity).

> ...Bernie

You seem to accept Ken Ham's claim that he correctly understands Book 1.

Actually many of these science-faith issues were around long before the

advent of modern science. Also YEC readings of some pssages have forced