RE: [asa] RE: Does Creator Imply Designer?

Christine,

I agree with your position. What I was pointing out was that, to someone
from a literalist camp who regards the Bible as God's highest form of
revelation, it couldn't be simpler -- God said it was done in 24 hours, God
said it was done over the course of 6 days, God said he made the kinds to
reproduce after their kinds (not after endlessly changing kinds), God said
Adam and Eve were the first two members of the human race, God said all
people on earth were killed in a global flood. God either spoke the truth
about those events, or he was giving deceptive history -- what I termed
"appearance of narrative". In their view, if we reject God's word, we are
unbelievers who are not willing to trust God at his word. This is their
argument against someone like yourself (or me, for that matter) who is
willing to acknowledge that those scriptures are not scientifically or
historically precise by today's standards.

I wrote this in response to Rich's statement on the other side of the coin,
when he said (I believe it was in reference to the YEC "appearance of age"
theories), "Presenting appearances that are deceptive are out of character
with God as described in Scripture." My point was simply that the
appearance vs. reality allegation can be made on both sides.

No, with you, I am more comfortable acknowledging that God's purpose in
scripture was not scientific/historical precision by modern standards, but
rather covenant relationship, so I have no problem considering ideas such as
accommodation, ANE cosmology, etc., at least up to a point. I don't believe
that God has planted deceptive appearance of age everywhere we look, and yet
asks us to believe the earth is young against all evidence, as a test of
faith or something. That doesn't make sense to me.

Jon Tandy

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Christine Smith
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 9:56 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] RE: Does Creator Imply Designer?

Hi Jon,

You wrote:
"> But the argument itself (God is a God of truth, not
> deceptive) on its own
> doesn't prove either side. Either you have God creating an
> old-looking earth and telling us that it's young (the YEC "appearance
> of age" doctrine), or you have God telling us "Here is an account of
> the creation of the universe" when it really isn't (the "appearance of
> narrative" position, i.e.
> the Biblical account is either myth, or phenomenological, or ANE
> cosmology, or accommodation, or pre-scientific errors of human
> authors, etc.)."

I don't follow...are you trying to say that the Bible's use of different
methodologies for expressing truth (i.e., the ones you list above, such as
myth) necessarily equate to God deceiving us, simply because its not
straightforward/obvious to us in this day and age? If so, I couldn't
disagree more. We are culturally and historically removed from the Genesis
stories by 5,000 years--I think its more than expected that we would have
trouble grasping its proper genre and interpretation. I don't think its
"appearance of narrative", or whatever else you might like to call it, makes
God deceptive, I think it shows rather, our ignorance and/or our entirely
different cultural/historical mindset.

In Christ,
Christine (ASA member)
 
--- Jon Tandy <tandyland@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Rich Blinne wrote:
> "Some parts of God's nature are mysterious and others are not. For
> example, God is a God of truth and there is no shadow of turning for
> Him. Presenting appearances that are deceptive are out of character
> with God as described in Scripture. When I dabbled with YEC and OEC
> that part of creationism and ID
> always bugged me. Because of that cognitive
> dissonance when I dropped all
> of the above my faith remained relatively unscathed.
> God wasn't false nor
> Scripture, just the fallible interpretations thereof by people."
>
>
> This argument is a two-edged sword. I just read a typical YEC
> article, where it was heavily emphasized that since God is a God of
> truth, and since he has given us scripture which tells us about
> creation, therefore Theistic Evolution and other scientific ideas that
> oppose this "fact" undermine God's truthfulness. Your argument is a
> good rebuttal, by pointing out the YEC position also requires God to
> be deceptive in creating false natural history that has the appearance
> of great age.
>
> But the argument itself (God is a God of truth, not
> deceptive) on its own
> doesn't prove either side. Either you have God creating an
> old-looking earth and telling us that it's young (the YEC "appearance
> of age" doctrine), or you have God telling us "Here is an account of
> the creation of the universe" when it really isn't (the "appearance of
> narrative" position, i.e.
> the Biblical account is either myth, or phenomenological, or ANE
> cosmology, or accommodation, or pre-scientific errors of human
> authors, etc.).
>
> YEC has the more persuasive argument among Christians, when they argue
> for holding up "God's word" as more true than the changing theories of
> human scientists. But in the end it's the weaker argument, because it
> takes a human assumption about scripture (that it must equal literal
> and perfectly accurate science/history) and elevates it to the place
> of scripture itself, in contradiction to solid evidence to the
> contrary.
>
>
>
> Jon Tandy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
> Behalf Of Rich Blinne
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 9:17 AM
> To: Alexanian, Moorad
> Cc: Don Nield; ASA
> Subject: Re: Does Creator Imply Designer? was Re:
> [asa] Stars May Not Be So
> Fine Tuned After All
> Some parts of God's nature are mysterious and others
> are not. For example,
> God is a God of truth and there is no shadow of
> turning for Him. Presenting
> appearances that are deceptive are out of character
> with God as described in
> Scripture. When I dabbled with YEC and OEC
> that part of creationism and ID always bugged me.
> Because of that
> cognitive dissonance when I dropped all of the above
> my faith remained
> relatively unscathed. God wasn't false nor
> Scripture, just the fallible
> interpretations thereof by people.
>
> Rich Blinne
> Member ASA
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to
> majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe
> asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to
> majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
> message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Aug 1 13:04:16 2008