Thursday, February 17, 2011

The PCA and...horrors!! Old Earth Creationism

In my mindless meanderings today, I found these this interesting article from Modern ReformationPCA Geologists and the Antiquity of the Earth

Basically, the PCA (Presbyterian Church of America) decided in 1998 to commission a study to determine if an Old-Earth interpretation was at least reasonable. The study wasn't conclusive (the committee didn't make a solid recommendation one way or another), but their results were very fair to the O-Earthers.

And of course, sigh, here is a response from a prominent Young-Earth group: Long-age Geology or Genesis?

Just for fun, let's contrast these very edited, severely biased (my own) quotes:

From the first article:
"Clearly there are committed, Reformed believers who are scientists that are on either side of the issue regarding the age of the cosmos...Covenant children who are raised with the impression that a young earth is integral to Christianity have their faith needlessly undermined when they are later confronted with the overwhelming evidence of the earth's antiquity, and many leave the faith. It is our prayer that no Christian would be such an obstacle!"
And from the other, oh-so-loving YE article:
"The battle over the integrity of Genesis continues. In a recent article, eight geologists, including long-time anti-creationist Davis Young, attempt to persuade the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) that secular natural history must guide, even determine, interpretation of the biblical text, even in the face of a clear contrary meaning....Given the clear effects of evolution and secular natural history on generations of Western youth (see Inside the mind of a killer), it is literally astounding that Christians could believe such a wild distortion of reality. (See Darwin’s impact) Especially when atheopaths like Richard Dawkins, Jacques Monod and T.H. Huxley had utter contempt for Christians pretending that evolution was compatible with biblical Christianity, as documented in the hyperlinked articles."
Anyway, let's play a game: can you spot the logical fallacies in the latter response? Let's see...
  • guilt by association
  • ad hominem attack
  • begging the question
  • straw man argument
  • possibly a dash of non sequitur
I'll stop there :^)

Ahh, it's so fun to see loving, balanced debate isn't it?? :)