TE Observations

[Mathematician]

I don't go over to C&E much and for good reason. YECs are not treated very well at all. There's a fellow named Edmond who fits the description I'm talking about. I'm not here to say he's truthful or not because I don't know. What I do know is that in the thread I was reading he was repeatedly accused of things that had nothing to do with the OP and Christians were piling on with their own insulting remarks. This was just the most recent example of this, there have been many just like this over the time I've been a member.

YECs spread lies about what Scripture says and atheists believe them.

YECs spread lies about science and atheists call them fools.

What does that do for the spread of the Gospel? Atheists believe those they call fools (that means you) and dismiss Scripture accordingly.

You're in league with atheists to discredit the Gospel. You are giving them an excuse. We are supposed to make sure they have no excuse, not give them excuses.

 

[vossler]

And what exactly is that end result and how is it any different than a YEC slamming a TE by joining the chorus of other YEC's? Is it any different than the YEC's we see questioning the faith of their fellow believers?

Please be specific.

First of all a YEC slamming a TE is not permissible. The difference is that at least its family that's doing the slamming. An analogy would be if my sisters got together and slammed me mercilessly over my views over, let's say gay-marriage is one thing, but for them to invite people I don't have anything in common with into the fray and use them against me is a whole other thing.

You seem to be suggesting that it is inappropraite to agree with a non-believer. If the best you can do to defend your ideas is to try to taint believers who agree with non-believers that your ideas are wrong, then I would say that the ideas must not be very well supported in the first place.

I'm not saying anything of the sort, you're reading into what I'm saying. I'm just showing some of the observational differences between TEs and YECs. Whether a TE agrees with a non-believer in and of itself has no little to no meaning. But it could have meaning if their shared belief is contrary to what another believer believes, but then again it may not. But it should, at the very least, draw a little extra scrutiny; don't you think?

You seem to be suggesting that it is inappropriate for a believer to chime in and agree with someone who is mercilessly slamming the believer.

That's exactly what I'm saying and that's even more true when that someone is a non-believer.

Would you apply this same criticism to a YEC who mercilessly slams the beliefs of a TE? It would seem hypocritical if you did not.

Yes I would!

Your constant and repetitive (and often unfounded) slamming of TE's and you repeated insinuations that somehow their faith is not as strong as yours would seem to fall into the category of behavior that you are here criticizing.

If I've, as you say, constantly and repetively slammed TEs then I will apologize. Please point out where and if found to be true an immediate apology will be issued.

When other YEC's pile on in agreement with you, do you chastize them? Why not?

If they do I have, on occasion, PMed them to let them know.

Why do you limit your criticism to TE's when so many of them equally apply to old earth creationists, ID supporters and even other YEC's who slam other believers, yoke themselves with non YECs to support their point of view, and don't read the bible the same way you do?

I'm not criticizing anyone, I'm just pointing out the differences I've noticed between TEs and YECs.

 

[vossler]

YECs spread lies about what Scripture says and atheists believe them

This is your opinion, I haven't seen any lies perpetrated concerning Scripture, but that doesn't mean it hasn't occurred. You'll have to be more specific in order for that charge to carry any weight.

YECs spread lies about science and atheists call them fools..

What does that do for the spread of the Gospel? Atheists believe those they call fools (that means you) and dismiss Scripture accordingly.

Whether they do or don't I'm not knowledgeable enough to say. I'm not a scientist, nor will I ever claim to be. As for the spread of the Gospel, well, IMO, science doesn't play any sort of role in its spread.

You're in league with atheists to discredit the Gospel. You are giving them an excuse. We are supposed to make sure they have no excuse, not give them excuses.

I don't understand this statement, please explain.

 

[Mathematician]

This is your opinion, I haven't seen any lies perpetrated concerning Scripture, but that doesn't mean it hasn't occurred. You'll have to be more specific in order for that charge to carry any weight.Whether they do or don't I'm not knowledgeable enough to say. I'm not a scientist, nor will I ever claim to be. As for the spread of the Gospel, well, IMO, science doesn't play any sort of role in its spread.
I don't understand this statement, please explain.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/overheads/pages/oh20020208_104.asp

Take as look at this picture. How many times have you repeated it? It's a lie. Ham knows it. But he hopes you don't check.

 

[notto]

First of all a YEC slamming a TE is not permissible. The difference is that at least its family that's doing the slamming. An analogy would be if my sisters got together and slammed me mercilessly over my views over, let's say gay-marriage is one thing, but for them to invite people I don't have anything in common with into the fray and use them against me is a whole other thing.

Then I consider your difference to not be an important one and simply one you feel the need to hide behind to justify your actions against TE's (and by extension, OEC and ID's).

I'm not saying anything of the sort, you're reading into what I'm saying.

Now you know just how TE's feel when you try to interpret their intent while ignoring their actual statements and explanations

I'm just showing some of the observational differences between TEs and YECs. Whether a TE agrees with a non-believer in and of itself has no little to no meaning. But it could have meaning if their shared belief is contrary to what another believer believes, but then again it may not. But it should, at the very least, draw a little extra scrutiny; don't you think?
That's exactly what I'm saying and that's even more true when that someone is a non-believer.

Then you must feel the same way about William Dembski and ID, right?

Yes I would!
If I've, as you say, constantly and repetively slammed TEs then I will apologize. Please point out where and if found to be true an immediate apology will be issued.

How many threads like this have you started focusing specifically on TE's while avoiding criticism of id and OEC and YEC's who themselves disagree with you? Why do you try to tie them to unbelievers and secularists as if that has any validity to your argument? Why do you constantly appeal to emotion in an attempt to criticize the faith of fellow believers? Why do you group them all together based on the comments of a few?

If they do I have, on occasion, PMed them to let them know.

And for all you know, TE's do exactly the same thing yet you somehow miss that as a possibility.

I'm not criticizing anyone, I'm just pointing out the differences I've noticed between TEs and YECs.

If you don't consider the following to be a veiled criticism, then I think we must be working from a different definition. The only way I can read this is that you are saying that the things you listed somehow show that TE's are demonstrating few of the characteristics of a believer.

So even if a TE or anyone else demonstrates few of the characteristics that make someone a believer, I’m not called to judge the individual.

 

[chaoschristian]

As a newer member to this forum, at least within the Origins Theology section, you may not have been aware of many of the observations I've listed and for that you get a pass. However, if your goal is to change what I've written to align with what you really wish I had said, well I'm not going to play that game. My statements were observations, if you wish choose to ridicule them, you're free to do so. But since you can't respect them for what they are and the spirit in which they were presented then I will exercise my free will not respond.

You are either uniformly naive or utterly disingenuous. I don't have enough evidence yet to decide one way or the other.

1. Just because I have a low post count and have become a member recently doesn't mean that I haven't spent time researching CF in general and the subforums that interest me in particular. So set aside your bit of patronizing, and let's focus on the real issue.

2. The real issue is that you made base assertions about the nature and character of TEs. What you call 'observations.' You posted these generalized 'observations' and couched them in language that was definitively judgemental. Yet, and this is important so pay attention, you have provided absolutely no (as in none, nada, zip) verifiable evidence to back up your 'observations' or support your judgments. Since you consider yourself my senior, then you ought to know that if you are going to make any sort of claim in a debating forum on CF then you had better be prepared to back it up. Which you didn't do and still haven't done. Back up your claims or retract them.

3. My goal was not to change what you had written so that it was in line with what I wish you had said. My goal was to amplify the subtext of what you had written so that it was obvious to both you and others, but more especially for you. It was an attempt to help you understand how what you had written was received. I don't think I was too far off base as no TE who has participated in this thread has yet to say, "Gee, Vossler, thanks for the insight. You hit the nail on the head when it comes to us silly ol' TEs"

4. Again, ridicule was not my intent. But if you feel ridiculed by what I wrote, then perhaps that's a signal to yourself to go back and reconsider what you wrote and how you wrote it.

5. Do you expect me to respect disrespect? I know that you say that you mean no disrespect, but I can't help but feel that I've had an olive branch shoved up my nose by what you have written.

Step back for a minute and consider this: it seems that you wrote your OP in the spirit of reflecting on the new year and new year resolutions and all that good soul searching stuff that seems to infect people at this time of year. Great. But it has been my experience that when one wants to reflect on the year past and make resolutions for the year coming that it is accepted good form for one to do this for oneself and not someone else.

You are not a TE, but a YEC (as observed in your posts and your profile.) So why not make 'observations' and 'reflections' on YECs instead of TEs. At least then it would be genuinely reflective instead of accusative.

 

[Battie]

I didn't necessarily say there was something right or wrong with it, just that it was a difference between YECs and TEs.

Then why point it out at all? Why point anything out if there's nothing wrong with it?

How on earth are we supposed to reconcile if we're not able to forget our differences?

 

[vossler]

Then I consider your difference to not be an important one and simply one you feel the need to hide behind to justify your actions against TE's (and by extension, OEC and ID's).

If that's how you feel, that's your perogative, I have no problem with that.

Then you must feel the same way about William Dembski and ID, right?

If you mean that his views should be scrutinized, of course, all of us who make claims of one sort or the other have our views scrutinized, even me.

How many threads like this have you started focusing specifically on TE's while avoiding criticism of id and OEC and YEC's who themselves disagree with you? Why do you try to tie them to unbelievers and secularists as if that has any validity to your argument? Why do you constantly appeal to emotion in an attempt to criticize the faith of fellow believers? Why do you group them all together based on the comments of a few?

I don't know, I don't keep track, given your tone it sounds like you do, so tell us how many. As for the OEC position, well for one it's not nearly as well represented here as the TE one is.

While it may not be important to you when a group of people who are Christians have tied their views to unbelievers, it is important information to me.
As for the emotion stuff, I'm not trying to introduce emotion, but you seem to keep bringing it up. Nothing I've said was emotional.

And for all you know, TE's do exactly the same thing yet you somehow miss that as a possibility.

That may well be a possibility, I don't discount it. You asked me a question and I answered you, in the process you wanted me to draw out other answers, maybe you can help me give better answers by making it easier for me to understand your original question.

If you don't consider the following to be a veiled criticism, then I think we must be working from a different definition. The only way I can read this is that you are saying that the things you listed somehow show that TE's are demonstrating few of the characteristics of a believer.

So even if a TE or anyone else demonstrates few of the characteristics that make someone a believer, I’m not called to judge the individual.

No I don't consider it to be a veiled criticism and it seems neither did Lady Kate or ebia. From some reason you do, I'm sorry you feel that way. C'mon are you telling me that you don't know Christians who in your opinion aren't walking and talking the way the Bible tells us to? Remember I used the word characteristics in association with a believer and what I choose to judge is how those characteristics are manifested. I'm trying my best not to judge the person but only their actions. Is this now off limits too?

 

[BlackSaab52]

Fellow Origins Posters:

With a new year upon us I thought it might be a good time to take a step back a look at who we are and what makes us this way, more specifically, TEs and YECs.

The following statements are some of the ones that I can remember being made by TEs. As far as I know not a single one was ever refuted by another TE, so it would be safe to say that TEs, at least in general, believe these statements to be true. The purpose here is not to incite but to inform and assess what we believe.

When referring to the Bible as the Word of God many TEs are offended, to the point that some will call those who do believe this idolaters and/or blasphemers.

Personally, I don't have a problem calling the Bible the Word of God.

A TE stated that God loves everything, the animals, trees, plants and rocks, just like he loves us.

Where have any TE's stated this? God does love all of His creation

TEs stated that the feeding of the 5,000 was the miracle of sharing.

I believe this was an actual miracle.

TEs are against the very idea of students even hearing about, much less studying, either Creationism or ID in a science classroom where origins is discussed.

I don't have a proble hearing about creationism, but since the science isn't too great, I don't think that ID should be taught in science classes.

These are in addition to the more obvious fundamental, foundational differences between TEs and YECs.

• When the Bible says that that God created in the universe, earth and all that is in it in 6 days, TEs view this as non-literal, meaning it was either allegorical or mythological. YECs believe the Bible, more specifically Genesis 1, simply states exactly what occurred.
• Science plays a significant role as to how a TE views and/or interprets the Bible. Science plays no role, or at most, a very small role, on how a YEC views and/or interprets the Bible.

Why do I not believe the Bible if I don't believe the six days in Genesis are literal days? Are you going to suggest that just because I don't believe the millenium in Revelation 20 is a literal 1000 year reign that I don't believe in it at all?
Why shouldn't science play a role in how to interpret the Bible? And I have a hard time believing that you wouldn't interpret Joshua 18 to be teaching geocentricism if it wasn't for science.

Some other interesting observations:

Not a single TE statement or view listed above can be supported by the Bible.

And considering that not all TE's believe in everything you said they do, then this is wrong.

Most TEs views are supported by the secular world.

The science is, but the theology isn't.

TEs will yoke themselves with unbelievers in order to discredit a fellow believer.

When fellow believers are promoting faulty science, then I see nothing wrong with trying to correct them.

TEs believe the ACLU to be a good organization.

Even though I'll admit that they've done some good things, I think I can agree with you that as a whole they're a bad organization.

O.K., now that I’ve said this, what’s my purpose with this thread? The most obvious answer would be that I want TEs to accept God’s Word as it is plainly written, but that would be too simple and probably not very realistic. However it is a good thing to pray for.

Again, just because TEs don't take everything in the Bible as literally as possible doesn't mean that they don't believe the Bible. I don't know how many times that has been reiterated in this forum.

 

[vossler]

Then why point it out at all? Why point anything out if there's nothing wrong with it?

In order to better understand why we think so differently.

How on earth are we supposed to reconcile if we're not able to forget our differences?

Actually I'm not trying to forget our differences, but highlight them. Reconciliation doesn't occur until the differences that we have are known. Hopefully, this then leads to dialog that doesn't cover ground that has already been well established.

 

[Battie]

In order to better understand why we think so differently.
Actually I'm not trying to forget our differences, but highlight them. Reconciliation doesn't occur until the differences that we have are known. Hopefully, this then leads to dialog that doesn't cover ground that has already been well established.

Okay, but this thread, as far as I can tell, has done nothing to explain the psychology of your fellow members. What I see in your OP (as others have said) are blanket statements that do not show a clear understanding of the TE point of view.

It's already clear what our basic differences are, when it comes to origins. I don't see how dredging up stuff like this, especially when not all TEs necessarily believe them, is going to help. I'm sure you had the best of intentions, but all I see here are more bad feelings.

 

[gluadys]

Well, insofar as anyone can love a rock, God certainly does... He did create them, did He not? I would like to know who told you that He loves them as much as us...

It was me, Lady Kate. And I will still stand by this. And affirm that scripture stands by this. God does indeed love all his creation, not just his human creation.

 

[vossler]

You are either uniformly naive or utterly disingenuous. I don't have enough evidence yet to decide one way or the other.

I suppose I’m then uniformly naïve, because I do know I’m not disingenuous.

1. Just because I have a low post count and have become a member recently doesn't mean that I haven't spent time researching CF in general and the subforums that interest me in particular. So set aside your bit of patronizing, and let's focus on the real issue.

I don’t believe there is anything I can tell you that you will find in some way positive.

2. The real issue is that you made base assertions about the nature and character of TEs. What you call 'observations.' You posted these generalized 'observations' and couched them in language that was definitively judgemental. Yet, and this is important so pay attention, you have provided absolutely no (as in none, nada, zip) verifiable evidence to back up your 'observations' or support your judgments. Since you consider yourself my senior, then you ought to know that if you are going to make any sort of claim in a debating forum on CF then you had better be prepared to back it up. Which you didn't do and still haven't done. Back up your claims or retract them.

O.K. since this is very important to you, I’ll go along. Give me one of the issues I raised, your choice, and I’ll provide the “evidence” you so much desire.

3. My goal was not to change what you had written so that it was in line with what I wish you had said. My goal was to amplify the subtext of what you had written so that it was obvious to both you and others, but more especially for you. It was an attempt to help you understand how what you had written was received. I don't think I was too far off base as no TE who has participated in this thread has yet to say, "Gee, Vossler, thanks for the insight. You hit the nail on the head when it comes to us silly ol' TEs"

Given that I was the one that wrote it but you seem to have a better understanding of what was said than I do, why should I respond back, you should already know what I’m thinking and not need to see the words.

4. Again, ridicule was not my intent. But if you feel ridiculed by what I wrote, then perhaps that's a signal to yourself to go back and reconsider what you wrote and how you wrote it.

Maybe I should just accept it and not question it, it’s far easier.

5. Do you expect me to respect disrespect? I know that you say that you mean no disrespect, but I can't help but feel that I've had an olive branch shoved up my nose by what you have written.

I’ve tried my best to be respectful with you, but it doesn’t appear that there is anything I can say that would be received in the manner that it is sent. You feel I’m shoving the olive branch you’ve provided up your nose. I don’t in any way wish for you to feel that way, so it might be best then that I not respond to your posts since they seem to have the opposite effect that I desire.

Step back for a minute and consider this: it seems that you wrote your OP in the spirit of reflecting on the new year and new year resolutions and all that good soul searching stuff that seems to infect people at this time of year. Great. But it has been my experience that when one wants to reflect on the year past and make resolutions for the year coming that it is accepted good form for one to do this for oneself and not someone else.

The last year has had a lot of discussion and my observations were my reflection of those discussions. I asked if you didn’t agree with my observations to correct me. That, IMO, isn’t disrespectful, but unfortunately for me it appears to be so for you.

You are not a TE, but a YEC (as observed in your posts and your profile.) So why not make 'observations' and 'reflections' on YECs instead of TEs. At least then it would be genuinely reflective instead of accusative.

So, YECs shouldn’t reflect or observe behaviors of those who are not like them?

 

[gluadys]

The key thing in my observation was "in order to discredit a fellow believer" Remember these observations are area where TEs and YECs are different.

And that is still accusatory. You don't know that is the motive for a TE disagreeing with you.

As Notto pointed out (and as Saint Augustine pointed out centuries ago) unbelievers are not necessarily stupid. They can and do make observations about reality that are correct. If TEs agree that those observations are correct, and therefore disagree with YECist beliefs, the motivation is not to discredit a fellow believer, but to uphold the reality of creation.

I do believe that it is as necessary to take seriously the revelation of God's creation as to take seriously the revelation of God's inspired scripture. I have no wish to discredit a fellow believer, but I do believe it brings disrepute on all believers, when someone spouts ignorance about God's creation in the name of upholding what scripture "plainly says".

 

[chaoschristian]

O.K. since this is very important to you, I’ll go along. Give me one of the issues I raised, your choice, and I’ll provide the “evidence” you so much desire.

You wrote the OP and started this thread. You made the assertions. Now back them all up, every last one of them. Why should I or anyone else settle to see proof of just one when its has been made quite clear by several people now that we have issues with all of your 'observations.' So, back them up.

It should be clear to you now that your OP was done in bad form. I'm trying to hold onto the belief that you had good intentions. I'm trying to hold onto the hope that you will see why we are raising objections to what you wrote. I do not deny your right to make observations and formulate opinions about others. I do not deny your right to share said observations and opinions by posting them on this forum. I do hope you understand if the objects of your observations and opinions then exercise their right to respond to both the content and substance of said observations and opinions.

I seem to be off-putting to you. This is unfortunate and if I have put too fine a point on things, then I apologize. It will do much and go far if you respond positively to my request in the first paragraph and demonstrate verifiable evidence for all that you claimed in the OP.

 

[gluadys]

I believe this was an actual miracle.

So do I. By either interpretation.

 

[vossler]

Personally, I don't have a problem calling the Bible the Word of God.

That's good to hear, thanks!

I believe this was an actual miracle.

Was the miracle that folks shared or that there was more than enough food?

[/list]Why do I not believe the Bible if I don't believe the six days in Genesis are literal days? Are you going to suggest that just because I don't believe the millenium in Revelation 20 is a literal 1000 year reign that I don't believe in it at all?

Again, this was just pointing out differences, not making claims that TEs don't believe in the Bible.

Why shouldn't science play a role in how to interpret the Bible? And I have a hard time believing that you wouldn't interpret Joshua 18 to be teaching geocentricism if it wasn't for science.

Again, the point being how we're different, not whether science is good.

And considering that not all TE's believe in everything you said they do, then this is wrong.

Whether they believe what I believe isn't the point.

When fellow believers are promoting faulty science, then I see nothing wrong with trying to correct them.

Good, neither do I.

Again, just because TEs don't take everything in the Bible as literally as possible doesn't mean that they don't believe the Bible. I don't know how many times that has been reiterated in this forum.

Agreed!

 

[vossler]

You wrote the OP and started this thread. You made the assertions. Now back them all up, every last one of them. Why should I or anyone else settle to see proof of just one when its has been made quite clear by several people now that we have issues with all of your 'observations.' So, back them up.

For whatever reason you obviously don't like me, that's o.k. I can live with that. It would be nice if you didn't dislike me as you do, but I don't need for you to like me. No one else has questioned the validity of the observations except one, and ownership for that one was already claimed. If you wish to be demanding that's your option and perogative, just as it is my option and perogative to not respond. If I sensed any sort of love or genuine desire for understanding coming from you I would have gladly looked up everyone of these observations, but obviously the tone and hostility you've displayed toward me would preclude anything positive coming from such an effort.

I do not deny your right to make observations and formulate opinions about others. I do not deny your right to share said observations and opinions by posting them on this forum. I do hope you understand if the objects of your observations and opinions then exercise their right to respond to both the content and substance of said observations and opinions.

I don't understand much of what you say or the purpose for saying it, still I respect your right to say them.

 

[SBG]

To SBG: I understand what you mean even as I stand on the other side of the issue, and if I must find someone to blame I would start with myself. But what can we do about it? Is there anything that can be done about it at all?

I think that this kind of faceless interaction will inevitably bring about conflict. It is all too easy to forget that there is a real person on the other side whom you're busy shouting at, a person who goes to church and sings the same type of hymns (well, depending on denomination ), who also puts money into the offering bag, who reads the same Bible (although a tad differently ), who faces the same struggles of evangelism and discipling and sanctification and how to live Christian in such a ruined and horrible world. If we were talking face to face we probably wouldn't shout as much; we might even like each other. But like it or not, this is the reality that we live in: the world is changing into one where a significant portion of people in our lives are people we never see and meet. The Church needs to learn how to compensate and adapt to that before faceless communication fragments us, as it indeed has here.

I thank you, for you are the first to reply honestly to my position. In my experience, I have watched my actions that have been towards others who believe differently and there is no grace or mercy being shown. Yet, when I fall to my knees I beg for grace and mercy. How can I justify what I ask from God when I won't give it to my fellow man? I cannot.

You and I may believe differently about origins, but does this mean I cannot offer you mercy in how I react to your positon? Instead of telling you off or putting you down, I can I not simply say we disagree and call you brother? Vossler is right, we let our flesh get in the way of how we act towards one another.

Simply stating that we are on a forum and are not face to face is an excuse in my opinion. Here, we are displaying what we really think and are saying it. If we were face to face would we say such a thing or only think it? I believe it matters not to God if we say or think, for thinking it is as bad as saying it.

I brought this up, not because of what I see in others, but because of what I have seen in myself. And I looked here and it seems others feel as I do and react as I do. I am saddened by how I have treated many people here. It isn't enough to apologize. I must change and I must change now. I cannot go to God with a clear concious and ask for something I refuse to show another person. Especially when the other person is just like me, sinful and God is not. If I cannot, being sinful, show grace and mercy to someone else who is sinful, I cannot expect God who is sinless to show me that mercy and grace.

With some of the response I have received, I wonder if I am one of the few here who has come to realize this. By our actions, many here (including me) have shown we don't care about showing anything other than distaste and hatred to each other. Is that how God wants us to be? Or do we even care about how God wants us to be enough to actually try and change?

 

[Numenor]

I didn't necessarily say there was something right or wrong with it, just that it was a difference between YECs and TEs.

Fallacy piles up upon fallacy. Do YECs never agree with atheists about anything?