Dr Kurt Wise

[JohnR7]

"For Dr Wise, the authority of the Bible is non-negotiable. He received Christ when he was nine years old, and maintained the absolute truth of Scripture throughout his school years.

At one stage he even took a pair of scissors to a Bible, and started cutting out the sections which would have to be discarded if evolution was true, with its long ages for the earth. He found that there wouldn't be enough of the Bible left for it to hold together.

'To accept the entire evolutionary model would mean one would have to reject Scripture. And because I came to know Christ through Scripture I couldn't reject it.' At that point he decided his only option was to reject evolutionary theory."

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3119.asp

 

[ReUsAbLePhEoNiX]

"
'To accept the entire evolutionary model would mean one would have to reject Scripture. And because I came to know Christ through Scripture I couldn't reject it.' At that point he decided his only option was to reject evolutionary theory."

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3119.asp

This mans ego, paralized at the fact that maybe his "truth" needs simple adjustment. Willingly chose to be dishonest, just to maintain his sense of comfort and security, and self identitiy. The Ego is a powerful.

 

[wblastyn]

The Nicene Creed
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

From http://www.mit.edu/~tb/anglican/intro/lr-nicene-creed.html

The Nicene Creed is a summary of Christianity. Where does evolution deny any of it?

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

What about this:

Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand.

Cited by Dawkins from http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/dawkins_21_4.html

So he admits that regardless of evidence supporting evolution and a very old earth, he would still support young earth creationism, even if he recognizes that there is evidence of a very old earth and evolution(which he probably learned during his educational career) and even if young earth creationism is falsified by the data (which it is). Now that's intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Doubting Thomas]

John, I'm curious to know what your purpose was in starting this thread. Wise's scriptural dogmatism is well known. Do you mean to hold him up as an example of a "good Christian" or a discredited scientist?

 

[ReUsAbLePhEoNiX]

I think one big reason why people do this is because they are more concerned with "pleasing God". A form of Martyr Syndrome?They feel that God honors non compromise in belief, no matter what the circumstance. That way when they face God they can be proud of how uncompromising they were in their faith. Holding their hands out to recieve some heavenly crown reward , to increase their social status and popularity in heaven.

 

[JohnR7]

John, I'm curious to know what your purpose was in starting this thread. Wise's scriptural dogmatism is well known. Do you mean to hold him up as an example of a "good Christian" or a discredited scientist?

What do you think: ""good Christian" or a discredited scientist"?

I just brought him up for discussion. Or any of the other Geologist that believe in the YEC. People seem to enjoy talking about Bishop Ussher & Lightfoot's theory and anyone who is a qualified scientist today that still believes that theory.

 

[Arikay]

The people at AIG are either Ignorant, or Lieing.

Either way, its not good for them.

 

[lucaspa]

What do you think: ""good Christian" or a discredited scientist"?

I just brought him up for discussion. Or any of the other Geologist that believe in the YEC.

Discredited scientist and bad Christian.

The heart of the scientific method is:
"...what we learned in school about the scientific method can be reduced to two basic principles.
"1. All our theory, ideas, preconceptions, instincts, and prejudices about how things logically ought to be, how they in all fairness ought to be, or how we would prefer them to be, must be tested against external reality --what they *really* are. How do we determine what they really are? Through direct experience of the universe itself. "

What Wise is telling us is that he will take how he PREFERS the universe to be, not how it is.

And what is his preference based on? His own EGO. His ego that his interpretation of the Bible is the ONLY interpretation and the correct one.

"If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault."

Wise can't discard his interpretation of the Bible. What he has done is worship his interprepretation of the Bible. He has built a false idol and is bowing down in worship to it. Ignoring God and His Creation. A clear violation of the First Commandment.

 

[JohnR7]

What Wise is telling us is that he will take how he PREFERS the universe to be, not how it is.

I am sure he would disagree with your assessment of him.

 

[JohnR7]

The people at AIG are either Ignorant, or Lieing.

Then it should not be hard to prove them wrong.

 

[PhantomLlama]

Then it should not be hard to prove them wrong.

And it isn't, as I am sure you must have noticed in your time on these boards.

 

[JohnR7]

And it isn't, as I am sure you must have noticed in your time on these boards.

I usually do not pay much attention to the creationist sites. But they were looking for YEC geologists and that was where my search took me.

Now I am looking to find what geological evidence they use to support YEC. I can see a 12,000 year YEC, but I have trouble to grasp the concept of a 6000 year YEC.

 

[Arikay]

Nope its not. Ive done it a couple times, one just recently.

Then it should not be hard to prove them wrong.

 

[PhantomLlama]

I usually do not pay much attention to the creationist sites. But they were looking for YEC geologists and that was where my search took me.

Now I am looking to find what geological evidence they use to support YEC. I can see a 12,000 year YEC, but I have trouble to grasp the concept of a 6000 year YEC.

Most people here have trouble grasping a 6000 year YEC.

 

[JohnR7]

Most people here have trouble grasping a 6000 year YEC.

The problem is coming up with a explaination for genesis chapter one. Genesis chapter two starts 6000 years ago. Most everyone seems to agree on that.

 

[lucaspa]

I am sure he would disagree with your assessment of him.

So? Tell us how my assessment, based on the quotes you gave, is in error. Wise says clearly that if all the evidence were against his literalist interpretation of the Bible, he would still insist on that literalist interpretation. That is exactly insisting that the universe be what he PREFERS it to be. Not what it is.

BTW, what did you think of the analysis that Wise is worshipping a false idol?

 

[lucaspa]

Now I am looking to find what geological evidence they use to support YEC. I can see a 12,000 year YEC, but I have trouble to grasp the concept of a 6000 year YEC.

Wrong search. You can ALWAYS find supporting evidence, IF that is all you are looking for. That's why is it not the supporting evidence that counts heavily, but the evidence that FALSIFIES or REFUTES a theory.

This is how Karl Popper, a famous philosopher of science, put it:

"1. It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every theory -- if we look for confirmations.
2. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky predictions.
3. Every 'good' scientific theory is a prohibition: it forbids certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is.
4. Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or to refute it.
5. Confirming evidence should not count *except when it is the result of a genuine test of the theory:* and this means that it can be presented as a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory. "

Flood Geology and YEC were falsified by 1831. The data that falsified them is still there. No matter what "supporting evidence" you now find, it is useless, because that cannot account for the evidence that refutes Flood Geology and YEC.

 

[lucaspa]

The problem is coming up with a explaination for genesis chapter one. Genesis chapter two starts 6000 years ago. Most everyone seems to agree on that.

There are many more problems than that. You can start with the contradictions between Genesis 1 and 2. The two stories can't be reconciled.

By "most everyone" you mean creationists. But they are far from "everyone" or even a majority. Even the most liberal counting within Christianity has only 25% of Christians being creationists. Once you get out of the creationist community, the people who think Genesis 2 is 6,000 years is a very small minority.

Also, Genesis 2 is also contradicted by the data. There was no sudden creation of animals in their present form then. Most of the mammalian species today have fossils that are identical to modern organisms that are far older than 6,000 years.

Then there are the DNA studies that trace modern human DNA back 100,000 years or so. That contradicts Genesis 2 being 6,000 years ago.

The list of problems of a literal Genesis 2 goes on and on.

 

[JohnR7]

Flood Geology and YEC were falsified by 1831. The data that falsified them is still there. No matter what "supporting evidence" you now find, it is useless, because that cannot account for the evidence that refutes Flood Geology and YEC.

So why is there a growing group of Geologists who do not believe that Flood Geology has been Falsified? NOt only that, but there are a number of them who believe that the ice age came after the flood.