RE: ICR/AIG claims

From: Hofmann, Jim (jhofmann@exchange.fullerton.edu)
Date: Mon Sep 08 2003 - 15:31:22 EDT

  • Next message: SteamDoc@aol.com: "Re: David Wilkinson"

    You might also look at this review of Kenneth Miller:

     

    http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/tj_v15n3_mil
    ler.asp

     

    It includes these comments:

     

                               Miller's last paragraph is, 'What kind of God
    do I believe in? ... I believe in Darwin's

                               God'. This is, theological language aside,
    completely indistinguishable from a nonexistent

                               God. Especially as Darwin's well documented
    anti-Christian motivation has baneful

                               implications for any professing Christian
    claiming to believe in 'Darwin's God'!27

                               Evolution is inherently atheistic, and it is
    time that we all face this fact.

     

    Jim Hofmann

     

     

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Freeman, Louise Margaret [mailto:lfreeman@mbc.edu]
    Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 11:56 AM
    To: asa@calvin.edu
    Subject: Re: ICR/AIG claims

     

    The AiG website has an essay by Gish that says "Yes, one can be a
    Christian and an evolutionist, but such a position is both
    scientifically and biblically untenable. The Lord Jesus took a literal
    view of Genesis. The theory of evolution is dishonouring to God as
    Creator, and its teaching leads to a disastrous secularizing of
    society."

     

    Complete essay is here:

    http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1152.asp

     

    Also, from Ken Ham at ICR. "Theistic evolution is a compromise position
    that destroys the foundations of the Gospel message and ultimately leads
    to the destruction of the Christian worldview. It is nothing more than
    the pagan theory of evolution with God added."

     

    This essay goes on to specifically speak against OEC views in the next
    paragraph.

     

    For the complete statement, in context, see:

    http://www.icr.org/pubs/btg-a/btg-003a.htm

     

    So, statement (1) may be technically true, it is misleading. Statement
    (2) seems to be a half-truth at best.

     

     

    I am reminded of the old Saturday Night Live "Tounces, the Driving Cat"
    sketch... "Oh yeah, he can *drive,* just not very *well*..." as car,
    feline and passengers plunge over the cliff to certain death.

     

    The clear message is: "Oh yes, non-YEC's can be Christian. They are
    just those types of Christians who disagree with Jesus, dishonor God,
    accept scientifically untenable pagan theories, destroy the fondations
    of the Gospel, threaten the Christian worldview and lead society to
    descrution."

    __
    Louise M. Freeman, PhD
    Psychology Dept
    Mary Baldwin College
    Staunton, VA 24401
    540-887-7326
    FAX 540-887-7121

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Burgy <jwburgeson@juno.com>
    To: asa@calvin.edu
    Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 15:51:14 GMT
    Subject: ICR/AIG claims

    > (1) Neither ICR, nor AIG, nor Morris nor Ken Ham, has ever asserted
    > that non-YECers are not Christians.
    >
    > (2) Both ICR and AIG have explicitly said, in print, that they reject
    > such a claim.
    >
    > I am looking for literature citations which might refute (1) or
    support
    > (2).
    >
    > Joe has also challenged me to submit a list of questions to him in
    > advance of the seminar. Lots come to mind. What questions (make them
    > short) would list members suggest?
    >
    > Burgy (John Burgeson)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Sep 08 2003 - 15:33:44 EDT