From: Iain Strachan (iain.strachan.asa@ntlworld.com)
Date: Wed Apr 30 2003 - 16:22:53 EDT
George wrote:
> A bit of history may be helpful for those relatively new to the list. A
few
> months ago Jim Eisele, then new to the list, was trying to defend the
truth of the
> Genesis creation accounts - "truth" meaning the kind of thing
fundamentalists &
> concordists want, accurate historical &/or scientific accounts.
Apparently concluding
> that that wasn't possible, he now declares himself an atheist & criticizes
the Genesis
> accounts because they _aren't_ true in that sense.
>
Thanks in general for the comments that followed this paragraph, which by
and large I think are pretty sensible. If one bases one's whole faith on a
completely literal view of early Genesis, then if something really
convincing challenges that (like the simple observation that we can see
light from galaxies and supernovae that are millions of light years away),
then that faith is liable to crumble. It nearly destroyed Glenn Morton's
faith (see his website for his own personal testimony on this), and it seems
to have destroyed Jim's faith. For most of my Christian life, I have been a
pretty unquestioning accepter of the evolutionary viewpoint; however
recently, largely as a result of working in an area of probabilistic
modelling, machine learning and optimization theory, I have come to the
conclusion that there are legitimate reasons to question whether the
Dawkins-like view of evolution is valid. I shall therefore continue to look
into the ID alternative, without basing my entire faith on it.
However, there is one other bit of history about this affair (Jim's evolving
views during his membership of the list) that does disturb me deeply about
the way this list functions, and I'd like to raise it now for due
consideration. I do not feel that the list function at all as a loving
Christian community; those in the minority, who don't support the status quo
(at least of the some of the most vocal members of the list), get treated
almost as if they are dreadful enemies. Now, when I first decided to become
a Christian, it was the aspect of Christian love that brought me to a
decision. I attended a weekend house-party of the "Crusaders" organization
(a kind of non-denominational Sunday school), when I was 16 (29 years ago
now!). Previously, my faith had been based entirely on intellect & I
thought I'd got it all worked out pretty well. The weekend brought home to
me that something intangible and wonderful bound the people together that
was more than the sum of their parts. It was the love of God that brought
people together. That combined with the fact that the speakers repeatedly
emphasised the importance of inviting Jesus into your life as your personal
Saviour, convinced me, and I did so, in the privacy of my own bedroom,
shortly after returning from the House Party.
But the cut-and-thrust and point scoring that goes on in this list does not
bear the least resemblance to what I experienced all those years ago, and if
I'd witnessed such things on that weekend, I would have been put off
Christianity for life!
The very worst example of this, which frankly horrified and outraged me was
an incident some months ago when someone (I won't name them), put up a post
on the list suggesting that we should make e-mail technology work for us.
They showed that it was relatively straightforward to set up an email
"filter" that scanned incoming emails for the phrases "Jim Eisele", and
"otherbiblecode.com" (Vernon's web site), so that such posts could be
immediately transferred to the "trash" folder. Jim subsequently angrily and
very tellingly described this as a "twit filter". Needless to say I thought
the suggestion to encourage people to put all Jim's and Vernon's posts in
the trash folder was highly offensive behaviour and I am completely
astonished that a Christian could even contemplate such an act. Then to add
insult to injury, someone else replied to this email with words to this
effect "hooray, no more bible numerics or day-age nutters for me" (I forget
the actual words, but it was something like that).
Actually, that wasn't the lowest the list ever sunk to. The real low point
was when someone actually rejoiced in the fact that Philip Johnson had had a
stroke and was therefore (at the time) out of action. But for that comment
the poster was throughly and rightly condemned by other members of the list,
even those who considered themselves to be implacable opponents of Johnson.
But the above "Twit Filter" affair was never, (to my knowledge) commented on
adversely, so I'm commenting on it now, and registering my dismay.
I think it's easy in a group of highly qualified scientists to fall into the
trap of intellectual pride, and I suggest that we all need to learn a little
more humility, and show a bit more respect for those in the minority.
Frankly, if the level of sarcasm and insults doesn't decrease dramatically,
I will feel that the only thing I can do is withdraw politely from the list.
I am fallible, and liable to write things I later regret when I see
something (as I do all too often) that angers me being said on the list.
And because of that I end up in inner turmoil worrying about having said
something that has deeply offended someone, or wondering where the next
rebuke is going to come from.
Also a word for Jim. When you write lines like:
**WARNING - ANTI-CHRISTIAN SENTIMENT TO FOLLOW**
you are frankly being very patronising. If you wish to enter into an
Atheist/Christian dialogue, by all means do so, but please try at least to
be courteous. If you write patronising stuff like this you will only
succeed in antagonizing people, and causing them to rise to the bait. It
may not be the way Christians are supposed to behave, but we are all
fallible. It is so easy to bash off a crisply worded email and hit the
"send" button without properly considering the consequences.
But I'd just like to summarise my thoughts by quoting a short poem by one of
America's finest poets, Emily Dickinson (who was evidently thinking of 1
Cor 1:20-21 at the time):
------------------------
Much Madness is divinest Sense -
To a discerning Eye -
Much Sense - the starkest Madness -
'Tis the Majority
In this, as All, prevail -
Assent - and you are sane -
Demur - you're straightway dangerous -
And handled with a Chain -
-------------------------
So please. Can we all be a bit more loving?
Iain
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 16:23:02 EDT