The argument that I hear most consistently from YECers is that the Bible comes first, and that one cannot change ones interpretation of the bible based on what science tells us. I think this is only in part a distrust of science, and a concern that all scientists are deluded by scientific materialism, but also in part, a good faith decision to make the Bible the only source of truth. This in itself is an position that may or may not be true, but to get at the YEC, we would have to find biblical passeges that point to general revelation as a source of truth that complements special revelation. That should be the first goal.
But even after that I dont think that scientific knowledge will be persuasive to them, and then we need to present non-literal hermaneutics that do not appear, to them at least, to be a means of re-interpreting the bible in light of scientific evidence.
The quick & inadequate answer to Christine's question is to point to the
many good books, articles, videos &c over the past ~30 years that have dealt
with science-theology issues, & questions about age & evolution in
particular, by Christians. I, & I know others on the list, could give
extensive lists. But these will not get through to a YEC if he/she is not
willing to read them &, more than that, read them with some openness to the
possibility that some of his/her ideas might change. One big obstacle to
having the latter frame of mind is the large amount of disinformation with
which YEC promoters have instilled people. E.g.,
Biblical texts don't tell us anything real if they're not accurate
historical accounts.
God couldn't have allowed "death before the fall."
If there was no historical fall, as recounted in Gen.3, then there's no
need for a savior.
We can't "see the past" so scientific cosmology & evolution are just
speculation.
& there are others. So while we would like to present an essentially
positive understanding of how real science is compatible with Christian
faith, some amount of deconstruction of such false notions may need to be
done before there can be any openness to a positive argument.
In addition, we need to take seriously the serious commitment to the real
essentials of the historic Christian faith, as summarized in the creeds. It
will not do to present them with some type of generic deity who acts through
the evolutionary process. (I assume, of course, that I'm talking to people
who want to avoid throwing out the baby with the bath.) Though I realize
that this is not the only possible approach, this is one reason why I think
it's important to give Christ a central role in the discussion. IMO the
mistake that a lot of TE presentations make is the assumption that
religion-science matters are just First Article concerns.
Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jul 02 2007 - 08:52:31 EDT