The impact of YEC'ism

[gluadys]

You mean that science has found the exact age of the Earth using repeatable and observable methods?

Yes. It is 4.5 billion years give or take a few million.

 

[shernren]

We also should acknowledge that TEs is as guilty of attacking YECs as YECs are of attacking TEs. After all, the original post was not very positive on YECism.

I speak only for myself here, but personally I have found that I feel extremely uneasy nowadays posting on the Open CE forum. In fact, the last time I posted there was simply to tell the story of my "conversion" a few weeks ago. (What a terrible word to have to use!) Why?

Because if I support YECism, I am open to being attacked for not treating science and the physical world with respect. It would be a valid argument against me. During my YEC days I never investigated anything the YEC sources said (or I would have *converted* earlier).

And if I attack YECism, I am open to being asked why I feel the need to attack my "fellow brethren", and I am in danger of not showing the love which Jesus said the world would know us by.

SBG asked if I evangelise to the atheists. When I do, I remain agnostic about the origins. If you want to believe in evolution, that's your business - I have nothing to tell you about science and everything to tell you about Jesus. I have raised the question of whether YEC-TE is a theological or scientific schism, and if it is a theological schism it is illogical to want atheists to take a stand on it even before joining the faith!

 

[Delta One]

Vance,

Listen to these Salvation testimonies, changed lives and personal impact stories because of creation evangelsim recieved by AiG and published in the accurately named 'Victory Chapter' of Creation Evangelism for the New Millennium by Ken Ham:

Thank you for your faithfulness to God and to the defense of His Word and the gospel of Jesus Christ. I was a religious Baptist and an evolutionist (B.S. in Geology), and had a false conversion as a child. Thanks to the modern creationist movement, I now am certain of my salvation by faith in Jesus Christ alone. Thank you for answering God's call to return the chruch's confidence in all the Bible.

E. C., Clayton, NC.

I started a creation organization at my university in Iowa this year. We showed the video Evolution: Fact or Belief. We drew a moderate crowd with about six ardent evolutionists going "pssst" every time something was mentioned that they didn't like. Later on, two evolutionary atheists became believers in Jesus Christ! I am very much in favour of your message and style and would like to be considered a satellite group to your organization.

T.B., Iowa.

I was saved as a result of being convinced that evolution was a lie and, hence, was led to read Genesis and the rest of the Bible.

R.L., California.

Thank you for all the great things you do! I am a biology major and am constantly bombarded with evolutionary theory. I must admit that my faith was very much damaged until I came across your ministry on the radio. Your ministry exposed me to highly educated Christian scientists who also believe in the Bible. This type of exposure has restored my faith. I particularly enjoyed the cassette where Ken and a physicist from New Mexico defended creationism. ... Thanks, again, for confronting evolution head on and in doing so, giving honor to our LORD and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

J.S., Michigan.

I am currently a student at the University of Cape Town and am very interested in acquiring the video series Answers in Genesis featuring Ken Ham and Dr. Garry Parker. The work that you have been doing was very instrumental in my coming to know the LORD Jesus in 1994.

J.L., South Africa.

Hi. I'm from Leonard. I thank you for sending me your newsletter. It has really changed my life. I used to not care about Christians or God or anything religious. But since I've beeen getting the newsletters, I have started going to church, listening to Cristian music. I gave the LORD my life and I have joined our youth witness program. I want to thank you for helping me achieve all of these goals. Would you pray for me? Thank you so much. I will continue to pray for you and AiG.

H.E., Texas.

Your ministry revitalized my faith and has been wonderful for equipping me to defend my faith. Your ministry brought my brother to Christ and now he is raising godly children.

J.H., Arkansas.

After an Answers in Genesis seminar, one lady wrote, "Thank you, God, for bringing me back into life." One young man, Darren, who had never heard the creation message before listened throughout the whole day. He is not a Christian, but said that the seminar was excellent. He has been reading The Lie: Evolution and another creation book throughout the week nad he has also taken creation videos from our library. He is showing incredible interest and came to church on Sunday - he has really been challenged to become a believer. We are praying and believing for him to soon be the LORD's, if he's not already. Also a Japanese lady read The Lie: Evolution in Japanese. She went to the seminar on Sunday and told me the next day she understands it clearly and now believes the creationmessage.

R.H., pastor in Australian church.

Bless you! Your letter of July 24th was received with much shouting and rejoicing (mine)! Your generosity in providing the materials which you have outlined is a blessing indeed. When you and hte AiG staff read that there is revival in the prisons, you can smile, knowing that you are a part of this move of God in our land.

J.W., Prison Chaplain, Florida.

I have used your material for several years, and have used them to bring three people to the LORD. Keep up the good work.

K.S., Victoria, Australia.

About a month ago, I gave a subscription of Creation to a co-worker. He was very impressed with the magazine, and it was an answer to prayer to hear him change his views from atheistic evolutionary dogma to truth from the Bible. A few short weeks after he got the subscription, we had a Bible study on his need for salvation. He believed that the Bible was God's valid Word and recieved Jesus Christ as his personal Saviour. I know that God used your magazine to dispel error and deception from his mind so that he could clearly see and understand the Bible.

J.B., Kansas.

I've only got one thing to say: Hallelujah!! Praise the LORD and thank Him for Creation evangelism!! If it weren't for it there would be many more lives taken out of God's loving presence by the evil one who uses evolution to undermine the truth and authority of God's Word. As you can clearly see from these few examples, evolutionism undermine's people's faith in the Bible and leads them to have weaker faith and as such, they do not shine brightly for our LORD.

What you have to understand is that probably all of the atheists and agnostics that you come across on most forums are hardcore. They are 100% biased and nothing that anyone presents will change their opinion. When I say hardcore, I mean hardcore!

Take for example a few comments:

“YECism was the large and powerful stepping stone that led me out of christianity. I have no doubt that I would still be a christian if it wasn't for YEC.”

One has to ask why? Guess what kind of answer you'd get. I can tell you that they would say something along the lines of either:
'Creation is just a religion and not science'.
'Creation has been disproven by science'.
'Creation does not fit the evidence'.

All of these three positions show their clear misundersanding and ignorance of what science is and the true nature of the creation/evolution debate (i.e. philosophy vs philosophy - not science vs religion!)! Also, this gentle obviously knows of TE, why isn't he a Christian? He said that creation was supposed the means for him losing his faith because it said that evolution was not compatible with the Bible, then he has heard from compromising Christians that TE can be 'compatible' with the Bible - why is he still a sceptic? He is obviously lying through his teeth just trying to get another hit on creation. I'm not too suprised though.

To non-Christians, lying is neither 'right' nor 'wrong'. As Christians, we are told by God's Word to never lie and always tell the truth. I find it weird and some what disturbing that Christians would accuse fellow Christians of lying or purposefully misrepresenting the facts when we have a basis and a command to tell the truth - you're obviously just repeating the rhetorical unsubstantiated garbage that non-believers enspouse over and over again without proof.

And take this jackass' response for further consideration:

“Considering the sheer absurdity (and the dishonesty routinely used to promote that nonsense) of "scientific" (ha!) creationism, anyone who starts to insist on any kind of creationism has a very good chance of making me reject fully whatever faith he tries to "sell" to me.”

He has just shown beyond all reasonable doubt that he does not understand creation, the nature of the creation/evolution debate, what science is and how it can be applied to the debate. This person is what I mean by hardcore. He is so wound up in his bias that nothing will change it.

I am willing to bet anyone on this forum my computer, all the pc games, and all the money that I have - which isn't much - that this gentle cannot:

a. give any examples of creationists being dishonest in their promotion of truth.

b. why creation is not science, yet evolutionism is (that stands up to scrutiny).

Or anyone for that fact cannot do both a and b. By creationists, I would prefer the major creationary institutions like AiG and ICR.

Most said that while the TE option would be more likely to allow them to even consider Christianity, it would not likely be enough. Still, a crack in the door is better than the slamming shut that YEC'ism causes.

Vance, these people's hearts are cold to hearing the Gospel and the creation message that is foundational to it. At these people we must move onto those who are willing to listen. They will ultimately be responsible for what they believe and they have chosen the punishment of unbelief, which is eternal death. To understand why Jesus came to Earth and why He gave His life for us, we must understand Genesis. Without Genesis, one has no foundation or basis for believing the Gospel message and it's message of Salvation and it's promise of there being New Heavens and New Earth.

Obviously, since these people are hardcore non-believers we should all expect them to say the responses that they did. To those who honestly seek the truth, creation evangelism is an effective tool to use in bringing people to Christ and further advancing His Kingdom.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Obviously, since these people are hardcore non-believers we should all expect them to say the responses that they did. To those who honestly seek the truth, creation evangelism is an effective tool to use in bringing people to Christ and further advancing His Kingdom.

this is the heart of the matter.
YECism is not truth, it is a gross misreading of God's book of nature. it is fundamentally anti-intellectual and in the long run bad theology.
To those who honestly seek the truth, OEC is a stable Christian position, YEC is not. Creationism is an evangelistic tool to bring people to a particular interpretation of Gen1, based on a faulty hermeneutic. Certainly it is a tool for evangelism into fundamentalism which is as much a modern social and political phenomena as it is a theological one.

....

 

[Vance]

Vance, why is the title of your post "The impact of YEC'ism" and not "The impact of dogmatic YEC teaching"? Isn't this like what you said about AiG and that alien book (still trying to read it btw).

Yes, that would have been a better title, but that is why I included the actual question in the OP, which specifies the dogmatic teaching of YEC'ism. I was trying to keep the title short and simple and let the OP do the talking.

Vossler, I agree that in no case was YEC the only reason, but in most cases it was A reason, in one case, they said they would still be a Christian were it not for YEC. The point is that the dogmatic teaching of YEC'ism IS a stumbling block to the Cross without doubt. Most importantly, it is an UNECESSARY one, since this is NOT a salvation issue.

It does a great deal of harm, and very little good, other than making existing YEC's feel justified in their existing interpretation. It is preaching to a particular choir while doing damage to everyone else.

As for evangelism, absolutely we witness to the non-Christians. While proseletyzing is not appropriate on the C&E Forum, I have snuck a bit of it in (I think Remus can remember a couple of instances), and have done more work via PM. More importantly, this issue comes up regularly when I am out witnessing elsewhere.

 

[Vance]

Delta, I am giving real world examples from people we know and can talk to. What you gave was self-promotion from a website, which means they will pick and choose among those responses that fit their agenda. Have you ever seen a bad review put on the back of a book?

Regardless, I have been out in the real world, witnessing on college campuses and I can assure you that the dogmatic YEC teaching will have a LOT to answer for when we get to Heaven. It makes me ill to think of the lost souls. The only reason ANYONE would lose faith over evolution is due to someone convincing them that it was contrary to Scripture.

 

[shernren]

To non-Christians, lying is neither 'right' nor 'wrong'. As Christians, we are told by God's Word to never lie and always tell the truth. I find it weird and some what disturbing that Christians would accuse fellow Christians of lying or purposefully misrepresenting the facts when we have a basis and a command to tell the truth - you're obviously just repeating the rhetorical unsubstantiated garbage that non-believers enspouse over and over again without proof.

You said it yourself. I'm surprised that Christians actually do purposefully misrepresent the facts. But they do. Sigh.

a. give any examples of creationists being dishonest in their promotion of truth.

b. why creation is not science, yet evolutionism is (that stands up to scrutiny).

Do I get a crack at it? Please?

For a: quoted from http://answersingenesis.org/docs2002/carbon_dating.asp ... (emphasis added)

As long ago as 1966, Nobel Prize nominee Melvin Cook, professor of metallurgy at the University of Utah, pointed out evidence that lead isotope ratios, for example, may involve alteration by important factors other than radioactive decay.39 Cook noted that, in ores from the Katanga mine, for example, there was an abundance of lead-208, a stable isotope, but no Thorium-232 as a source for lead-208. Thorium has a long half-life (decays very slowly) and is not easily moved out of the rock, so if the lead-208 came from thorium decay, some thorium should still be there. The concentrations of lead-206, lead-207, and lead-208 suggest that the lead-208 came about by neutron capture conversion of lead-206 to lead-207 to lead-208. When the isotope concentrations are adjusted for such conversions, the ages calculated are reduced from some 600 Ma to recent. Other ore bodies seemed to show similar evidence. Cook recognized that the current understanding of nuclear physics did not seem to allow for such a conversion under normal conditions, but he presents evidence that such did happen, and even suggests how it could happen.

Quite apart from the concise refutation at http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD016.html, note this:

However unlike other awards ceremonies the Nobel Prize nominees are not publicly announced and they are not supposed to be told that they were ever considered for the prize. The records are sealed for 50 years. This is done to avoid turning the awarding of the prize into a popularity contest. Due to this secrecy it is questionable whenever someone uses a Nobel nomination as a qualification (how could you check it?).

(emphasis added; from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize )

To make things worse: http://www.slcc.edu/schools/hum_sci/physics/whatis/biography/cook.html, which in no way mentions him being nominated for a Nobel.
There you go. Dishonesty in the representation of truth. The obvious motivation is that putting those words in the mouth of a "Nobel prize nominee" makes them sound more right. It cannot be carelessness either, for it took me less than 5 minutes to find the Wiki about Nobel Prizes, and as much as Wiki likes scientific articles I don't think they're in talk.origins' pay, are they?

For b: quoted from http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/about/faith.asp

By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

Now note that "apparent" and "perceived" are more or less equivalent to "observed", and "claimed" is more or less equivalent to "reported". In other words: "Whatever you say is bogus unless it agrees with what we think the Bible says!"

Ask any scientist how that is science. Go on. Science doesn't ignore anomalies: it explains them.

 

[SBG]

So, is faith given by Jesus Christ or origins?

Who sustains faith, Jesus Christ or origins?

If you lose faith, is because of a lacking relationship with Jesus Christ or a lacking relationship with origins?

Where does the power of conversion lie, in origins or Jesus Christ?

 

[Sojourner<><]

Keep in mind these responses are coming from people who have been steeped in secular evolutionary theory. If you could turn back time and ask the same question for an earlier generation then I'm sure that the responses you would have received would be much different.

The problem with evolutionary theory and OEC'ism is that it sounds convincing. But that doesn't make it true. Most people who believe TE and atheistic evolution accept these explanations because it makes more sense to them, but they don't truly understand the full implications of these theories.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Keep in mind these responses are coming from people who have been steeped in secular evolutionary theory. If you could turn back time and ask the same question for an earlier generation then I'm sure that the responses you would have received would be much different.

The problem with evolutionary theory and OEC'ism is that it sounds convincing. But that doesn't make it true. Most people who believe TE and atheistic evolution accept these explanations because it makes more sense to them, but they don't truly understand the full implications of these theories.

this is fundamentally a guilt by association error.
with a poisoning the well overlay.

i am interested in 19thC theology. in particular the first generation of reformed theologians(to encounter TofE) and how they reacted to evolutionary theory.
1-they could not as you put it, "have been steeped in secular evolutionary theory" since it didn't exist
2-as you say "If you could turn back time and ask the same question for an earlier generation then I'm sure that the responses you would have received would be much different."
so read what Hodge, Warfield and Machen said about evolution.
Hodge is against it. he writes that darwinianism == atheism
Warfield is a reluctant providential evolutionist that becomes more creationist as he ages.
Machen is like Warfield a TE and doesn't talk about it since it is against the church confessional standards.

so. to answer your question.
read _Darwin's forgotten defenders_

....

 

[The Lady Kate]

So, is faith given by Jesus Christ or origins?

Who sustains faith, Jesus Christ or origins?

If you lose faith, is because of a lacking relationship with Jesus Christ or a lacking relationship with origins?

Where does the power of conversion lie, in origins or Jesus Christ?

Tell it to the YECs. They'll be the first to tell you that without a literal Genesis (origins), the rest is meaningles...

 

[Sojourner<><]

this is fundamentally a guilt by association error.
with a poisoning the well overlay.

i am interested in 19thC theology. in particular the first generation of reformed theologians(to encounter TofE) and how they reacted to evolutionary theory.
1-they could not as you put it, "have been steeped in secular evolutionary theory" since it didn't exist
2-as you say "If you could turn back time and ask the same question for an earlier generation then I'm sure that the responses you would have received would be much different."
so read what Hodge, Warfield and Machen said about evolution.
Hodge is against it. he writes that darwinianism == atheism
Warfield is a reluctant providential evolutionist that becomes more creationist as he ages.
Machen is like Warfield a TE and doesn't talk about it since it is against the church confessional standards.

so. to answer your question.
read _Darwin's forgotten defenders_

....

Thank you, but I am not interested in what a small handful of scientists have to say. What I said concerns the majority of people in general, not a minority of intellectuals who trust more in their own understanding than the Word of Truth.

 

[SBG]

Tell it to the YECs. They'll be the first to tell you that without a literal Genesis (origins), the rest is meaningles...

I was hoping you could answer my questions....

 

[SBG]

I can assure you that the dogmatic YEC teaching will have a LOT to answer for when we get to Heaven.

If it wasn't for the Grace of God, everyone, including you would have tons to answer for. Not one here is without a sin that he/she should answer for.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Thank you, but I am not interested in what a small handful of scientists have to say. What I said concerns the majority of people in general, not a minority of intellectuals who trust more in their own understanding than the Word of Truth.

you didn't even bother to google who Warfield Machen or Hodge were, did you?



......

 

[SBG]

you didn't even bother to google who Warfield Machen or Hodge were, did you?



......

Maybe we can just say he doesn't believe what you believe and leave it at that instead of looking for an arguement?

 

[LewisWildermuth]

We also should acknowledge that TEs is as guilty of attacking YECs as YECs are of attacking TEs. After all, the original post was not very positive on YECism.

Yes the discussion often can become heated, how could it not when you have two such differing views.



When have a group "A" ties its faith into a particular reading of the Bible and any thing said that might cast doubt on that reading is seen as the work of Satan and a group "B" that does not hold to the readings of group "A" therefore are not seen as "Bible believing" or "True Christians" or "Mature Christians" or any other insulting remark ever though up by Group "A" there are bound to be some sparks.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Maybe we can just say he doesn't believe what you believe and leave it at that instead of looking for an arguement?

i for one am here to learn, i am annoyed at those who think that doing their homework is optional. he obviously didn't interact with the posting, Warfield, Hodge, and Machen are prominent late 19thC -early 20thC theologians not scientists, yet he responded to it.

I think it shows 1-a sloppiness in thinking 2-a desire to persuade not with evidence or argument 3-a rudeness to respond without even engaging with the posting 4-a lack of desire to really learn

all 4 are unbecoming of a Christian. and are not a good witness to an unbelieving world.

additional:
i think that the characterization of "intellectuals who trust more in their own understanding than the Word of Truth." which is directed at these 3 godly, Scriptural very knowledgable and honorable Christians is wrong and it is worth my time to say so.


.....

 

[Vance]

Lady Kate, you are exactly right. It is the YEC's who are making this an issue within Christianity. You don't see TE's out preaching their message in churches with tapes and pamplets. You don't see TE "ministries" out there asking for your money.

Most importantly, you don't see TE's saying that if their interpretation of Scripture is not correct they will abandon their Christian faith. We have seen a number of YEC's say that very thing on these boards. They ARE hanging their entire Christian faith on their particular view of origins.

That is why I have always called for the cessation of dogmatic "either/or" teaching of YEC'ism to both non-believers and our youth. We should not be raising our children to believe that if they come to accept evolution that Scripture must be wrong. We should not be telling non-Christians that if they don't accept a YEC reading of Genesis, they should throw their Bibles out.

And that is exactly what many YEC's have done. Right now, in the other forum, a YEC is proclaiming that if people don't accept a literal reading of Genesis, they should throw their Bibles away.

 

[SBG]

Lady Kate, you are exactly right. It is the YEC's who are making this an issue within Christianity.

Wasn't your point that a TE view can help bring people to Christ, which is called Christianity? So wouldn't that be an issue with Christianity?

You don't see TE's out preaching their message in churches with tapes and pamplets. You don't see TE "ministries" out there asking for your money.

And wasn't it you who said this is your ministry?

Most importantly, you don't see TE's saying that if their interpretation of Scripture is not correct they will abandon their Christian faith.

Wasn't it a TE who said if God came and said He did create in six days six thousand years ago, He would not be God?

We have seen a number of YEC's say that very thing on these boards. They ARE hanging their entire Christian faith on their particular view of origins.

YECs have told you over and over again that the issue of origins isn't the problem it is the reliability of Scripture that would be the problem.

That is why I have always called for the cessation of dogmatic "either/or" teaching of YEC'ism to both non-believers and our youth.

And if every YEC on this board stopped speaking on origins, would you stop speaking against YEC on this board?

We should not be raising our children to believe that if they come to accept evolution that Scripture must be wrong.

We should be raising our children on the Word of God, not evolution.

We should not be telling non-Christians that if they don't accept a YEC reading of Genesis, they should throw their Bibles out.

Please provide examples where YECs are telling non-Christians that they must accept YEC or they should throw out their Bibles.

And that is exactly what many YEC's have done. Right now, in the other forum, a YEC is proclaiming that if people don't accept a literal reading of Genesis, they should throw their Bibles away.

I would be willing to bet that all YECs would accept an old earth via the creation of a mature earth that would test to be older than it really is. Just like the wine example.