So do I. However, I suspect that most YEC's are holding to young-earth
creationism for reasons other than its value as an evangelistic tool --
although it certainly can be employed for that. I think the primary
driving factor is a desire to increase the confidence of Christians in the
solidity of the revelation in Scripture. Maybe it's my own experience.
When I first came in contact with YEC's, the idea that you could use
Scripture to interpret observational data so that it all came together
consistently with Scripture was very exciting to me. After a few years
the forced explanations and the lack of progress toward models with
predictive power began to get to me and I bailed out. But I can still
remember the excitement of hearing an explanation of the flood, for example
that was allegedly "more scientific" than the efforts of secular scientists
and was consistent with Scripture. In an age where it's fashionable to put
religion generally and Christianity in particular down, that rush of
excitement is enough to convince a good many people to hold tenaciously to
creationism, because it gives them both a defense and a weapon for dealing
with the cynicism of the rest of the world. I came to GM R&D 16 years ago,
but I can still remember how disconcerted some of my colleagues were when
they found out I was one of "those creationists". It was fun. But I had
to destroy it all by being willing to read some of the references --
chiefly in geology --that people suggested I should read, and I soon
decided that where I started as a Christian was a better place to rest my
faith than where I ended up as a creationist. In other words I went back
to basics: Christ and Him crucified.
I think that with the
>adverse publicity about things like Kansas, Dayton etc. the rest of the
>world is getting more converts one way or the other. There is also
>more home schooling than ever; most of it by YECs. So expect this
>issue to become even more strident in the next generation, maybe
>even approaching the controversy about slavery before the Civil War.
Sadly, I believe you are correct. The one glimmer of hope I see is that I
have detected a perception among the Christians I associate with that
creationists concentrate too much on trying to relate the Bible to science
and not enough on who Jesus Christ is and what He's done for us. A second
glimmer of hope is the fact that when these home-schooled kids go to
college, if they go to a school like Wheaton or Calvin they will not be
taught young-earth creationism in geology and biology classes. And they
will probably be exposed to honest, informed debate on issues which they
have seen only one side of while growing up.
>
>If the ASA wrings its hands about this -- what about the general
>scientific community? They are even more clueless about what to do.
>If all science is theory-laden, it is defenseless. The kind of
>relativism implicit in YEC ("there are two religious views, creation and
>evolution, both based on faith") fits comfortably into the postmodern
>culture, of which it is a part.
I have frequently thought about how nicely YECism fits into the postmodern
mindset. I wonder how many YEC's have thought about it, and how the
observation strikes them. Surely it cannot be comfortable being lumped
with postmodernists.
>
>This is indeed the age of irony, the twists and turns of which
>would make a 21st-century historian's head spin.
>
Agreed.
Bill Hamilton
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
Staff Research Engineer
Electrical and Controls Integration MC 480-106-390
GM R&D Center
30500 Mound Road
Warren, MI
hamilton@predator.cs.gmr.com / whamilto@mich.com (home)