Evidence for God from Science

Michael Spenser is often referred to as the Internet Monk and is one of the leading blogger voices in what is often referred to as the post-evangelical movement.

I happened to come across this post of his in his blog in which he declares himself OEC and why.

I thought it might be of interest for some here.

http://www.internetmonk.com/articles/C/creation.html

Interesting read.

It is interesting how the different OEC's are justifying their views too, including Spencer here. While many unashamedly state that science has had an influence on their view, many are also loathe to say it, out of fear of being accused that they "put science before the Bible".

In some discussions I've had on this topic, the insistence on a "literal" reading seems to be a point of dispute. It seems as if Spencer has had a similar experience. I have lived through much of the same in terms of being demonized by YEC's, to the point of being called a heretic outright. The style and aggression with which I was attacked in what I thought was a protected community of Christian missionaries shocked me, and will even say damaged my faith in Christian charity and intellectual honesty.

August. I have had similar experiences as well. Spenser is a Southern Baptist and remains as such. I was Southern Baptist earlier in my life and actually licensed to preach in the mid 80's by an SB church in Tulsa OK.

This was at the time that the SB denomination undertook to clean house in their colleges and seminaries driving out any who did not meet the standards of the "right" belief with regard to YEC. I was practically outright told by several pastors (one of whom is now a former President of the SBC convention) that is I were OEC, which I was leaning at the time, that there was no place for me in the SBC. What tipped them off was that I indicated in exploring their ordination process that I was considering going to Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville KY, which was considered to be the "hotbed" of such liberal views (until Mohler rose up and tossed most of his colleagues out of the institution and subsequently the denomination.)

That's a primary reason why I'm always leary of verbal disclaimers from the direction of those passionate in YEC. There may be a concession in theory that possibly someone can be OEC and still saved, but in practice when there is power and position involved, I've seen careers and families absolutely decimated by the willingness to elevate it to an issues of denying tenure, ordination and effectively throwing christian brothers and sisters out of service. The actions speak louder than the words.

In fairness too though, Spense alludes to this mentality and yet he's remained in the SBC and despite the questions he faces from within the SBC, he retains his credentials.

I also faced and experienced some of this with the PCA, although I wasn'tn formally credentialled there and the PCA has issued a declaration recognizing both YEC and OEC as Biblically literal positions in essence with freedom to believe in either direction. There's a strong faction within the denomination however, that still seeks to eliminate OEC.

I have not had any opposition to my views in the PCA yet, although I did get a few odd looks in group discussions. I know our pastor is YEC, and I hope to still have this discussion with him.

We are right in the middle of SBC country here in Dallas, and there is a lot of passionate YEC's around here. Friends of ours go around proudly telling people how their daughter challenged the science teacher about geology, in 9th grade...All good and well, one should be principled and proud, but also be open and receptive to understanding other positions, and willing to follow arguments to it's logical conclusions.

I guess what is frustrating to me is that many YEC's have this really smug attitude that they have it all figured out, and that it gives them some sort of moral superiority in creation discussions. Any challenge to their smugness is met with instant ad-hominem, instead of a patient discussion of the issues with people (like me) who sometimes really struggle with these issues.

August wrote:I have not had any opposition to my views in the PCA yet, although I did get a few odd looks in group discussions. I know our pastor is YEC, and I hope to still have this discussion with him.

We are right in the middle of SBC country here in Dallas, and there is a lot of passionate YEC's around here. Friends of ours go around proudly telling people how their daughter challenged the science teacher about geology, in 9th grade...All good and well, one should be principled and proud, but also be open and receptive to understanding other positions, and willing to follow arguments to it's logical conclusions.

I guess what is frustrating to me is that many YEC's have this really smug attitude that they have it all figured out, and that it gives them some sort of moral superiority in creation discussions. Any challenge to their smugness is met with instant ad-hominem, instead of a patient discussion of the issues with people (like me) who sometimes really struggle with these issues.

Well said. That describes a lot of what I've observed and thought as well. I think it's trending and building momentum toward more open dialogue, but there's a strong core there that has drawn a line in the sand and for which their christian identity is tied into that issue. I think it's sad, but it's a reality.

Odd. As someone who used to be OEC, it was the smugness of the OEC camp, as I perceived it, that gave me the emotional stimulus to reconsider YEC arguments. I've since informally adopted a modified YEC position (I hold the earth is a few tens of thousands of years old, rather than the traditional six). I just always find it somewhat amusing when people want to blast YECs as being closed minded or arrogant or what have you, when I have experienced far more of that from the other side. Yet, in the interest of intellectual honesty, I also have to assert that no matter how arrogant people are on either side, that arrogance has no bearing on the validity of a position.

I realize this is an OEC board. Just food for thought for those of you here in that camp--when the pot calls the kettle black, no one wins. Pow-wows about how terrible, mean, divisive, and hateful YECs are come across as terrible, mean, divisive, and hateful, no matter how polite the tenor.

God bless

Jac3510 wrote:Odd. As someone who used to be OEC, it was the smugness of the OEC camp, as I perceived it, that gave me the emotional stimulus to reconsider YEC arguments. I've since informally adopted a modified YEC position (I hold the earth is a few tens of thousands of years old, rather than the traditional six). I just always find it somewhat amusing when people want to blast YECs as being closed minded or arrogant or what have you, when I have experienced far more of that from the other side. Yet, in the interest of intellectual honesty, I also have to assert that no matter how arrogant people are on either side, that arrogance has no bearing on the validity of a position.

I realize this is an OEC board. Just food for thought for those of you here in that camp--when the pot calls the kettle black, no one wins. Pow-wows about how terrible, mean, divisive, and hateful YECs are come across as terrible, mean, divisive, and hateful, no matter how polite the tenor.

God bless

Perspective certainly has a significant amount of bearing on conclusions drawn. There's no shortage of misundertanding on either side.

I have to honestly state however that YEC in general being the more narrow position naturally lends itself more to exclusivity. I'm not aware, (though there certainly may be cases) of people thrown out of denominations for holding a YEC position but I can easily point to multiple cases in the other configuration. I'm also quite frankly aware of many in denominations who hold ordination and teaching positions who either refuse to discuss their views in this arena because they are aware that they may lose their livlihood and position for doing so. Some I know of as well, in conversation who simply choose not to preach or teach on this issue because they cannot meet the expectations with integrity.

Those situations exist and are a reality. Recognizing that as a reality may come across to some in a YEC position as mean, divisive and hateful, from their perspective. I'm frankly more comfortable with running the risk of being perceived in that manner in terms of tone than I am with trying to justify the witchhunts and housecleanings that the more extreme camps of YEC have fomented. Those are much more tangible.

Mea Culpa in terms of my own tendency in that direction. It's much more than theoretical speculation. I have close friends and brothers and sisters in Christ who have been sacrificed upon the altar of this issue by folks in the name of YEC and it's very difficult for me to exclude that from my point of view.

Bart,

I understand your concern and your experience. For what it is worth, I could tell you stories just the same of people who are basically forced to keep quiet about their YEC views if they want to remain part of an organization or avoid outright ridicule (or, more commonly, deep suspicion) among their peers.

I'm not asking you apologize, in either sense of the word, for OEC exclusivism. What I am saying is that I find it a bit hypocritical for OECs to blast YECs for their exclusivism, which I am quick to recognize exists, and yet they turn around and practice exactly the same things themselves.

I won't press the issue any further. AGAIN, I don't hold OEC exclusivism against OECs. Not in the least. I don't have the least problem with it. I'm just pointing out something that perhaps those in your camp and on this site may find an honest appraisal from "the other side."

Jac3510 wrote:Bart,

I understand your concern and your experience. For what it is worth, I could tell you stories just the same of people who are basically forced to keep quiet about their YEC views if they want to remain part of an organization or avoid outright ridicule (or, more commonly, deep suspicion) among their peers.

I'm not asking you apologize, in either sense of the word, for OEC exclusivism. What I am saying is that I find it a bit hypocritical for OECs to blast YECs for their exclusivism, which I am quick to recognize exists, and yet they turn around and practice exactly the same things themselves.

I won't press the issue any further. AGAIN, I don't hold OEC exclusivism against OECs. Not in the least. I don't have the least problem with it. I'm just pointing out something that perhaps those in your camp and on this site may find an honest appraisal from "the other side."

Jac, I know of YEC people who are put in that position as well. I think it's worth pointing out that that context is secular in the scientific community. It's pretty rare in terms of Christian organizations rising to the level of exclusion. The Catholic Church educational institutionation might be a case in point as Catholocism tends to adopt a practical theistic evolution position, and it's possible that some faculty in a direct science position would experience something like that. I highly doubt however, that theologically such a position would be grounds for exclusion or that taking orders would. Maybe Byblos or some of our Catholic friends on the board could give insight.

I think you're stretching the exclusivism a little far however in terms of OEC. There's certainly room to state that in terms of participation on a board, although I hope we are reasonably accepting and welcoming here. I can only recall in the time I've been here one long term YEC person who got frustrated after a long series of posts and then left in frustration.

In terms of organizations and exclusivism coming from some form of organized OEC forcing YEC people out of teaching positions I think you'd be hard pressed. Those instances are coming more from the secular scientific community, not within the Christian community deeming the position as one giving rise to a barrier in fellowship.

Noting blind spots is a fair observation and I'll again confess to my own bias fueled by personal experience and observation. I still don't believe it is an unfair statement to note that there are forms of YEC (Not all within it) that tend to exclusivism and routinely raise questions of the OEC position undermining Biblical inspiration with pretty clear implications that any hermenuetic that allows for an OEC position must them undermine other doctrines.

It's not unfair to recognize that and point it out, and it doesn't have to follow that that means we on the OEC aren't prone to similar foibles. In terms of degrees however, and there may be some self-serving I don't see the OEC christian community doing anything to the degree that the YEC community has attempted to do and has implements in other contexts. If you have specific instances that are reflective of such a trend I'd be willing to reconsider that observation and modify it.

I say that without wanting to pick a fight. I'm just trying to be transparent as to my thinking in that area.

blessings,

bart

Canuckster1127 wrote:Michael Spenser is often referred to as the Internet Monk and is one of the leading blogger voices in what is often referred to as the post-evangelical movement.

I happened to come across this post of his in his blog in which he declares himself OEC and why.

I thought it might be of interest for some here.

http://www.internetmonk.com/articles/C/creation.html

This is good. The author is obviously a very sensible human being. With regards Ham and his connecting early Genesis with science, this is just complete and utter nonsense. Genesis could never have explained to us the complexities of creation, and it doesn't attempt to. That anyone would think it does simply beggars belief.

Jac3510 wrote:Odd. As someone who used to be OEC, it was the smugness of the OEC camp, as I perceived it, that gave me the emotional stimulus to reconsider YEC arguments. I've since informally adopted a modified YEC position (I hold the earth is a few tens of thousands of years old, rather than the traditional six). I just always find it somewhat amusing when people want to blast YECs as being closed minded or arrogant or what have you, when I have experienced far more of that from the other side. Yet, in the interest of intellectual honesty, I also have to assert that no matter how arrogant people are on either side, that arrogance has no bearing on the validity of a position.

I realize this is an OEC board. Just food for thought for those of you here in that camp--when the pot calls the kettle black, no one wins. Pow-wows about how terrible, mean, divisive, and hateful YECs are come across as terrible, mean, divisive, and hateful, no matter how polite the tenor.

God bless

Funny how you consider genuine criticism of a real problem "smugness," Jac. I see no arrogance, no smugness, no impious damnation from the oec side on this board; all I see is genuine and well-deserved criticism of Ken Ham and his complete and utter arrogance. It is rather easy to cite "pots and kettles" but rather less easy to actually prove this. If you think you can, I invite you to do so with quotes from the oec's on this board...

God bless

Bart (and Danny),

I'm not going to take the time to wade through the myriads of posts here on OEC vs. YEC and start quote mining. What I can tell you is that from my perspective, the exclusivism here is just as bad as any YEC I've ever seen. Sometimes it is blatant. Sometimes it is subtle. I can also tell you that I know of plenty Christian organizations--especially those that are apologetically oriented, but some local churches as well--where YEC views are ridiculed and derided as being dangerous to the Christian faith since they push people away from Christianity. I've known a LOT of OECs (given the circles I walk in) that are openly hostile to YEC tenants. But worse, in my opinion, are those who are not hostile, but "tolerant." That, in many ways, is the "smugness" I was originally speaking of--those Christians who choose to "tolerate" YEC views while regarding them as less educated, silly, trite, or what have you.

In many ways, I find the entire OEC line of thought rather condescending in this area. It's widely spread out in the entire community--the idea that YECs are divisive. They look at Ham and Hovind and use them to paint all YECs with that brush; that is inherently divisive. The notion is that any truly educated Christian--especially in science--would be OEC. Now, I realize it's not often stated that bluntly, but as one who has been seriously on both sides of the fence, I can tell you without question that attitude is prevalent, even on these boards.

Finally, the charges against YECs--that they make God a liar, that they mistake their own views for Scripture, that they make Christianity unbelievable, that they don't know how to properly read the Bible, etc.--are every bit as insidious as anything any YEC ever charged against an OEC. All three of those charges have been leveled on this board on several occasions, sometimes more explicitly than others.

Now, if I may quote our president: "Let me be clear." I do not have a problem with OECs leveling those charges. That, I think, is the fundamental difference between myself (I won't presume to speak for the YEC community) and OECs. If OEC is true, then YECs need to recognize that they ARE in danger of making God a liar, that they ARE making Christianity unbelievable, and that they clearly DON'T know how to read their Bible properly. I think we need to recognize those charges for what they are. But OECs need to be just as intellectually honest. If YEC is true, then OEC has a SERIOUS hermeneutical problem that runs the risk of transferring to other parts of Scripture. Gman and I had a discussion a long, long time ago on whether or not the snake in the garden was literal, and I pointed out, based on his hermeneutic at the time (a few weeks later, he changed his view), there was no historical basis on which to believe in the resurrection.

Am I, then, saying that OECs don't believe in the resurrection? Of course not. I am saying OECs are not saved? Obviously not. Am I saying that there can be no fellowship between OEC and YEC? Far from it! What I am saying is that the hermeneutical problem is a major one. Surely you recognize that on an exegetical level, the difference in the two camps is heremenutical.

With final reference, then, to the OP, my problem is not with the charges of divisiveness that OEC lays at the feet of YEC. I expect no less. That's the nature of doctrine. Statements that purport to be true necessarily require that their negation be false. I would hold any OEC that does NOT lay these charges on YEC to be intellectually dishonest. No, my problem is not with the charge. My problem is with the idea that somehow OEC is immune from the same thing, that somehow OECs are morally superior or more tolerant, less exclusivist, and, by implication, my "Christian." (I can point to times where the word "cult" has been applied to YEC beliefs.) THAT is the point I made originally, and THAT is the point I want you to consider. Nothing more.

Jac,

I have no real problem with what you're saying.

My problem is with the idea that somehow OEC is immune from the same thing

OEC's individually and collectively are not perfect. In terms of degrees however I stand by my statement that in terms of actions taken to "clean house" and sweep out there institutions, there is a faction of YEC (not all) who have indeed elevated things to the point of removing OEC proponents from teaching and ordination positions. I'm not aware of the same working in reverse, certainly not to a similar degree and I think that's a fair observation to make. You mentioned cases of YECs being treated in that manner which I can readily see is true, but the source of that is the secular scientific community (which can treat OECs in the same manner, case in point being Michael Behe and his academic tenure). Again, I think that is a valid point to make and I stand by it not smugly, not suggesting OECs aren't human or subject to excesses were the situations reversed.

that somehow OECs are morally superior or more tolerant,

Morally superior sounds like a projection on your part. I don't believe I've questioned morality or sincerity. In terms of tolerance of opposing position, I'll plead guilty to believing that in general OEC is more tolerant and open to discussion both within the camp and to YEC. Perfect in that regard, of course not.

less exclusivist,

No question in my mind. OECs in general are not as exclusivist as the farther factions of YEC (again not all). In terms of the spectrum of belief OECs are in the center of the spectrum and by definition not proactively seeking to exclude YEC proponents from the conversation and more open to discussion.

and, by implication, my "Christian."

No implication there that I see with the exception of those elements that are cultist.

(I can point to times where the word "cult" has been applied to YEC beliefs.)

I can show you where I've made that claim in terms of some elements (not all) of YEC and I maintain it and further I'm echoing words said in some articles on the main board by the sponsor of this DB. I maintain that there are elements of YEC that are cultist. (That would be easy to reassert by noting for example that Mormons tend to be YEC, but then again there are elements in OEC that could be described in that manner too. I think Jehovah's Witnesses would fall into that camp.) Of course, I will freely own that I mean some elements of fundamentalism who take their YEC and hermeneutically approach to where they see themselves as exclusively saved and those who disagree with them on some of their key points and on that basis they declare their soteriology insufficient to lead to genuine salvation. I think that's a relatively small portion, but it can be vocal.

I'm not aware of OECs as a movement that would reciprocate, but I may be mistaken.

YEC tends to be a strong and more organized sub-culture in some contexts and OEC less so, so that may not be a completely fair comparison.

THAT is the point I made originally, and THAT is the point I want you to consider. Nothing more.

I have a great deal of respect for you Jac. I consider you a smart person, sincere and I'm glad you're here. I also consider you a brother in Christ with whom I agree with more than I disagree and who I have learned from and hope to continue to do so. I'm fine with your position as you've described it and I don't consider you or your position reflective of the extremes that I've cited. I'm very open to reconsidering and modifying my positions and generalizations and I'll give some consideration as to what you're saying. Are you stating that you don't see any basic reflection of the general environment out there in terms of my responses and clarifications above to your assertions?

Might it be better for me personally and others in OEC to be a little less strident? Maybe so. Frankly, I think it's necessary to make those responses and observations in terms of the movements elements in the hope that there will be better understanding and communication. In general I think the OEC community has sought that conversation and dialogue and where we have made these declaration have been in response to the more strident and strong claims of YEC and in that regard we're more guilty of reacting in kind than initiating that type of dialogue.

That's a generalization and I certainly have my own blind spots so I'll leave it at that and think about what you've said.

I will say this....as a teacher in a Christian school, the only threatening letter and negative interactions for teaching all types of creation models have been from YEC parents.

Are you stating that you don't see any basic reflection of the general environment out there in terms of my responses and clarifications above to your assertions?

No. I'm saying that while you see it as primarily one sided, I see it going both ways. I am saying that I know of CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATIONS (not secular ones) where YECs are ridiculed and removed from power or teaching positions (or simply not allowed to ever assume them) precisely because they are YEC. Your argument that YECs are worse is one that I simply disagree with. In my personal experience--and this is merely anecdotal--it has been significantly worse in the other direction. I find a great many OECs condescending.

Note that there are two separate issues in that paragraph: there is the organizational issue and the personal issue. I'm saying that I've seen exclusivism on both sides, but if you were to force me to say which is worse, I would say on the personal side of things, the exclusivism comes out worse in OEC in terms of condescension. That's my personal experience.

Now, again, minus the fact that no one ought to be condescending, I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH EXCLUSIVISM. Truth, by its nature, is exclusive. At this point, I just sort of feel like a broken record. We just have different experiences, I suppose. I was just trying to submit, for your consideration, the idea that group discussions among OECs about how exclusivistic YECs are is self-defeating.

In any case, there is a reason I don't get into this discussion on these boards. I thoroughly enjoy the company here, and I have grown to love and respect you all very deeply. I am absolutely thrilled to see August back posting again. I hope he continues to do so. It is always such a joy to read his remarks, as is the case with you, zoe, and all the other regulars, whether they be OEC or YEC. I guess I'm sort of singing the koombaya song from the other direction. Pointing fingers doesn't help anyone. The best way to get past the animosity between the two camps is to simply drop it as individuals and then call it out within our respective camps when we see it applied to the other. So please don't take this all as an attack. Consider it an appeal to unity--I'm just asking you to recognize, or at least entertain the possibility, that YEC is no more divisive than OEC is.