jbt
John E. Rylander wrote:
>
> As usual, I don't have time for any significant reply, but two thoughts come to mind:
>
>
>
> (2) "Literal creationism" seems to -me- a poor choice for a scientific discussion for two reasons: (a) What sets aside YECs is -not- that they literally believe in creation, or believe in literal creation -- even ECs do that. The "literal" applies to their interpretation of the Bible, not to their belief in creation. (b) A few ECs, e.g. Glenn, consider themselves staunch literalists as well.
>
> Given that (i) YEC very clearly expresses what is distinctive in Morris et al's position wrt science, and (ii) hypothetically at least that the point is not to use emotionally loaded or unloaded, derogatory or euphemistic terms, but to be as clear as possible, I'd say stick with YEC at least insofar as one is discussing the scientific position. If one is discussing the theological position, then something like "Biblical literalism" (but not "literal creationism") would seem apt, although ...
-- ********************************************************************* John B. Tant http://wwwp.exis.net/~jtant jtant@nospam.exis.net ** ** Find out more about the Declaration! ** http://www.Declaration.net/ ** ** The opinions I express are my own, not my employer's ** http://www.infi.net/~stonebdg *********************************************************************