3 posts were split to a new topic: Comments on YEC experience on this board
Hasn’t changed my mind, but it has informed me on the types of arguments and responses being generated from the evolutionist & OEC crowd.
Any time the discussion is on-topic and non-confrontational.
That’s very hard to say. You’d have to ask them, but overall I don’t see much evidence of people here being open to adopting my point of view under any circumstances.
The cause of the impasse here is not significantly different than the cause of the impasse in the world at large. Peoples’ minds are made up.
Agreed on this
Frankly I stop following threads when it gets confrontational (quite a number of threads I have stopped watching). I probably end up missing interesting points but can’t be bothered to watch spats develop
Are there any that you have found persuasive enough that they are hard to deal with? Not suggesting that you are persuaded by them, but that you would see them as stronger arguments than others?
I have not found any of their arguments persuasive. Some of them are very hard to deal with, however, by virtue of requiring a lot of hard work and research to delve into. It’s easy to engage in elephant hurling, but it’s much harder to give an adequate response to everything.
Particularly with regards to GE, I have found that even the experts 1) cannot often explain their objections clearly and openly and 2) they often contradict one another in attempting to refute GE.
Is it possible because they are trying to explain highly technical concepts here in a “normal” language or do you mean that with regards to the scientific primary literature underlying their views?
Elephant hurling is a great phrase! I may have to appropriate that at some point in my life
that has to apply to both sides, especially when more than one point is raised.
Thanks cdods, it is good to hear that there are people who are helped here.
What would you say are the things that best helped you in that move?
I mean they are not providing any citations at all, and they are being deliberately vague.
The participation here is for YECs.
I don’t think you abandon a YEC view (or at least you shouldn’t) because of scientific evidence. At least in my case, I could only abandon a YEC view if I honestly believed that was not what the Bible taught.
This was the first place I encountered Christians who gave me good reason to reconsider a YEC interpretation. Previous encounters with Christian’s who believed in evolution had them abandoning theology because of science, not because they had change in how they understood the Bible.
I am happy to take recent YEC here - they were YEC when they came to the board so I am interested in their experience as well
So basically the quality could be improved with better citation of sources? Not sure how easily that is done when people have read literature that they don’t have immediately to hand but it is a fair comment if it hasn’t happened.
I think it is a bit harsh to say that they are being deliberately vague. I am not sure it is possible to tell that
A suggestion to improve moderator sanity. If there are comments made by others, a reply or will be taken as a vote the comment should stay. Otherwise ignore it or flag it for removal. Cleaning up a discussions in real time takes a lot of Mods effort, so please be patient and Mods will check in periodically.
If you want a comment should stay, you can always quote it (at least the relevant part) in your reply. so it will remain in the discussion even if the original comment gets moved. The same goes for comments from the Peanut Gallery; if you see something useful there, quote it, copy it, and move it to your comments in the curated thread.
Can you tell us more about this? By “this place,” I presume you mean the Peaceful Science forum.
Yes, Peaceful Science, the articles, but particularly the forum. There are a participants here who have made (to me a least) a good case for wide the Bible does not support a YEC interpretation. The key difference is that they made it, not by ignoring scripture, or by explaining scripture away because of science, but by making a strong positive case for a non-YEC interpretation as the correct interpretation.
I’m sure such folk exist elsewhere, but PS was simply the first place that I ran into them. It’s also not that they convinced me through great arguments, but that their statements forced me to step back and look at how my own hermeneutics, which in turn led to a different understanding on my part about what the Bible was teaching.
1&2. Strengthened them as I got to figure out fun and interesting science that helped me gain a picture of what is happening in Genesis 1. The criticism helped me realize some assumptions I had before weren’t scientifically correct. I have a better idea of how science comes up with the age of the universe and the earth as I’ve been learning things along the way.
3. Probably explaining science in a positive way both for Christians and people who are not. I think all scientists should think about how they could contribute. Perhaps my own bias, but I think I was taught science as a subject just to memorize with no discovery. Experiments came after learning. I hated high school labs. Science education needs a revamp. Maybe it has since the few decades I’ve been out of school.
4. I hope so. Hopefully I broke a few stereotypes of what a non-scientist YEC person is and why.
Great response, thanks for posting it
Could you elaborate on this one?
I hated school, not just the labs!
It’s much more fun to think about what God has done than what he hasn’t done. When we’re not thinking on the lovely, pure, noble, and just it leads to discouragement.
I think a good majority of any science curriculum especially at the youngest ages should have learning through experiment or observation. My kids are much more observant than me.
I liked all of school except science and choir. Can’t sing. At my liberal arts college, particularly enjoyed philosophy, political science, and psychology as classes outside my program and major. Probably would not be surprising to those I’ve responded to.
@ho_idiotes what are your views on origins?
I think I understand. Are you saying that looking at creation is a way to spur worship? How does this relate to positive explanation for non-Christians?
It is great that you have found constructive criticism helpful In places, that is a true encouragement to hear. If we can’t admit our understanding is flawed in some areas, even if not all, that is a worrying sign.
You have done that for me, to be sure.
I am a near Swamidassian (to possibly coin a phrase and avoid referencing things to GAE all the time, but am torn between William Lane Craig’s version and that of @swamidass. @jongarvey books have been a help towards starting to swing me to a more recent version than Dr Craig’s.
I find myself in the position of approaching the Bible as an act of communication, and treating it as such. Doing so leads me to the question of admitting that what is a clear and intuitive reading to me is not going to be that of the original recipients. There is too much cultural difference there. I highly recommend Hilber’s book that I have referenced elsewhere and is on the main page of Peaceful Science.
That said, I recognise that the key issues are clear enough, but am comfortable with there being ambiguity. That is present right through the Bible.
Do you have any thoughts on how YEC views could be better accommodated here? I definitely struggle with some of the aspersions about motive that get flung around from both sides, and that is as a casual viewer.