>
> To Lloyd,
(snip)
> You responded from a Theistic Evolution position, (please
> correct me if I'm wrong). That you believe that God is in
> control of all things including our Salvation, that the age
> of the earth is not relevant in the issue.
I'm not sure that I want to call myself a theistic evolutionist because,
if I understand him correctly, Phil Johnson finds that position too to be
untenable. You're right that I don't think the age of the earth is
relevant to the issues of the human fall (or original sin) and salvation.
> Now my sarcasm resulted from an earlier post from yourself
> refering to YECs as "...deserving of contempt and
> dismissal". It was the harsh intellectual snobishness that
> I was attacking.
You are right to call me on this. I should have been more careful.
I do not think the YEC *view* is deserving of respect or serious
consideration (although I applaud Glen Morton's heroic and untiring work
in rebutting it -- a form of respect and serious consideration) just as I
do not think that flat earth views, or the view that the NASA moon
expeditions were really hoaxes concocted with special effects photography
in a studio are deserving of respect or serious consideration. I do think
that all *people*, including adherents of the YEC view, are deserving of
respect and consideration.
> When I read your response, I was shocked that we share so
> much common ground. Our only major conflicting view is the
> age of the earth. There should not be conflict, but
> intelligent sharing of information.
>
> I apologize for my sarscasm. I take two steps back to
> listen and learn from educated men. We could all take a
> lesson from the character of Glen Morton.
Thank you. I agree with your assessment of Glen Morton.
Lloyd Eby