This is an interesting criticism. Yesterday I added the list of my
publications to my web page. Go see if I didn't treat myself in the same
fashion.
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/publi.htm
When we are wrong, factually wrong, we have no inherent right to have
people agree with us. And people have a duty to try to correct us. I
personally am grateful to the many people who confronted me when I was a
young-earth creationist. They didn't tell me my views were correct. They
pointed out over and over and over again that what I was saying was
contradicted by observational evidence. They didn't tell me that my views
were as good as theirs, because my views weren't anywhere near as good as
theirs. My views at that time were terribly misguided and someone (actually
many) was needed to tell me clearly that I WAS WRONG!!!! Far from doing bad
for me, they actually made me better.
We don't do anyone a favor when they say something false and we act as if
they are correct. When Don Boys, in a book introduced by Duane Gish, writes
of Baalbek,
"One of foundation stones weighs 2,000 tons, and could not
be moved using modern equipment! How did ancient men get the job
done?"~Don Boys, Evolution: Fact,Fraud or Faith, (Largo: Freedom
Publications, 1994), p. 189
And the Guiness book of records says that 3000 tons can be lifted by 1
modern crane, are we to simply say OK he meant well? In fact, the man is
factually wrong.
>
>I have asked you for you to state your what your Christian bona fides are, in
>order to assess your Christian credibility in attacking leading "Christian
apologists"
>like Hugh Ross and Phil Johnson. But you have ignored same. In case this was
>an oversight, I will again give you an opportunity to state what your
Christian bona
>fides are:
Doubting my Christianity huh? I believe that Jesus Christ was the son of
God, the maker of Heaven and Earth. He died on the cross, rose the third
day and today sits at the right hand of God the Father. It was his
sacrifice and his sacrifice alone that pays the penalty for my sins. My
works don't mean a thing. Through Him, and Him alone, is one able to find
eternal life and forgiveness of sin. Jesus is also to be the Lord of our
lives, meaning that we are to do what we believe He has led us to do. For
me, this means a struggle in the area of Christian apologetics, a struggle
I might add that has little to show for it.
I hope this satisfies you that I am a believer, but if it doesn't that is
your problem.
I also believe that above all, Christians, who are under the Lordship of
Christ, should NOT engage in sloppy scholarship, sloppy research, sloppy
logic and they should not be unwilling to correct what they say when they
are shown to be wrong. To do less than this is to engage in all of the
above. That is why Longisquama bothers me (it has been around for years and
years yet never discussed in Creationist literature). That is why Philip
Johnson saying that rodents gave rise to whales bothers me (Phillip E.
Johnson, "A Reply to My Critics: The Evolution Debate Continued," First
Things, November, 1990, p. 52). That is why it bothers me when Johnson says
that rodents gave rise to bats
("A Darwinist can imagine that a mutant rodent might appear with a
web between its toes, and thereby gain some advantage in the
struggle for survival, with the result that the new
characteristic could spread through the population to await the
arrival of further mutations leading eventually to winged
flight."~Phillip E. Johnson, Darwin on Trial, 2nd ed. (Downer's
Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1993), p. 104)
Pseudogenes were around for over 10 years but were not discussed in
antievolutionary literature until the past couple of years.
When an apologist says something factually wrong, is he bringing glory or
dishonour on the Lord? Which is it Stephen? Are we allowed to state all
manner of falsehoods in the name of Christ? Why should I not protest that
truth is not being served by his terrible scholarship? Consider this simple
but clear example:
Boys states:
"Studies have been done to chart the volume and rate of
sediment accumulation in the Mississippi delta, and it could not
be older than 4,000 years!"~Don Boys, Evolution: Fact,Fraud or
Faith, (Largo: Freedom Publications, 1994), p. 285
A few years ago on some list I posted a calculation of how long it would
take to deposit the sediment in the Gulf and it would be around 80 million
years. What Boys does not understand is that he is only talking about the
present delta which is not very thick and isn't older than 4000 years.
5000 years ago, the Mississippi river emptied far to the west of its
present site. Once again, a Christian apologist got his facts wrong as
every geologist who has studied the Gulf of Mexico would know.
Stephen, it is no crime to ask Christians to get their facts correct. To
make the kinds of mistakes that we do makes our Lord, our religion and us,
look foolish.
I would suggest that you read Ed Babinski's _Leaving the Fold_, where he
documents several people who became atheist because Christian apologists
were not able to answer their factual questions. And if you don't care that
people are becoming atheists because we christians avoid correction and say
silly things as if they were factual, then I feel sorry for you.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm