Glenn:==
>In reality absolutely every believer MUST make this decision.
Well, Glenn, I'm sure you probably know as well as anyone what a stubborn
fellow I can be :). Whenever I see a statement like this I usually get these
warning bells going off in my head.
When I said previously that if forced to make a decision I would probably
side with you I had in mind a kind of Pascal's Wager. Before deciding we
ask "what are the consequences if I'm wrong". We could also ask "what
are the consequences if I don't decide". It seems to me that if what you
say is true, then we should be able to isolate some really serious
consequences.
First let's take what I hope is a simpler case. Suppose some missionaries
are deciding whether to take the Gospel to a newly discovered people,
say the New Guinean natives you mentioned in another post. They
need to decide whether these people are human. What are the consequences
if the assume they are human but are wrong? What are the consequences
if they assume they are not human but they really are?
Now lets look at fossil men. In this case I think the consequences of
being wrong are much less severe. We are not, after all, going to sell
them into slavery or something. What are the consequences of being
wrong here? First let me see if I understood your argument. There
seem to be three factors involved in elevating this to an important decision.
1) An individual has taken sides so to speak in the debate over human
origins. They count themselves as a YEC, PC, MC, EC, TE etc. and
this view has certain consequences wrt the origin of humanity.
2) This person has certain doctrinal positions they hold dearly. Perhaps
some are completely non-negotiable.
3) There are certain hard facts from the fossil record, the rocks or whatever
that need to be dealt with.
What are the consequences of being wrong or of not deciding in a case
like this? The answer to this seems to depend on who the individual
is. If the person is a Christian apologist or someone in the public eye
or if the person is a teacher in the church who regularly talks about
origins issues (I really hate to think this occupies much time in Sunday
school!), then I think the consequences of being wrong are pretty
serious.
What about your average everyday layman? I don't see any bad consequences
at all from being wrong or even from refusing to decide. In fact, a lot of
folks don't even understand what's going on in items 1-3 above. For these
people the best thing is simply not to decide. I think a lot of troubles come
from people being spoon fed some incomplete information and then having
their arms twisted into taking some activist position. If only people would
have the courage to say they don't know what all the issues are and they
aren't going to decide then I think we would have a lot fewer problems.
For most Christians going about their everyday lives these issues are,
I believe, relatively unimportant.
I am reminded of following from Pascal:
==========================================================
543. Preface.- The metaphysical proofs of God are so remote from
the reasoning of men, and so complicated, that they make little
impression; and if they should be of service to some, it would be only
during the moment that they see such demonstration; but an hour
afterwards they fear they have been mistaken. -- Pascal
===========================================================
Substitute "scientific and theological discussions on the origin of man"
for "metaphysical proofs of God" and imagine some poor fellow (who has
to work for a living) one hour after attending a lecture by Duane Gish.
How did that go again .....?
Whenever I'm discussing these types of things with folks who are not
familiar with all the issues I generally take the approach of trying to convince
them that its not particularly important rather than trying to persuade
them to my own view. I assure them that they won't need to know any
of this stuff when they minister to the children at the mission down town.
[...]
GM:===
>
>I want to relate a story told me by a good friend who got a PHD in biology
>wanting to be involved in the creation\evolution debate. When he got out,
>he realized that the really tough issues are in geology. he then made the
>move in that direction and now is a very knowledgeable geoscientist. The
>entire issue of evolution lies inside of the rocks of the earth. All the
>evolution we see today is minor compared to what the record of life tells us
>from below our feet.
>
I like this. A good illustration of the fact of evolution.
Brian Harper
Associate Professor
Applied Mechanics
Ohio State University