Dwise1 posted a PM to me explaining that he was making a different point than what ICANT wants to discuss. Dwise1's point is a bit nuanced, so rather than try to capture his meaning in my own words I'll just post the main portion of what he said:
Dwise1 PM writes:
ICANT is proposing something completely different from what I was talking about. I don't care about biblical beliefs nor have any problem with them except when they cause big problems. One such big problem is the YEC belief that if the earth turns out to be old after all, then the Bible is just one big lie and should be thrown into the trash and we should all become atheists -- that is literally what one creationist insisted upon adamantly a couple decades ago.
What I was talking about was creationists' beliefs of what the consequences should be when they discover that their young-earth beliefs are false. What I keep hearing is as I just described: that would disprove the existence of God. I would challenge that belief. All that is proven by finding that your theology contains error is that it has gotten some things wrong. What you should do in response to finding that error should be to correct that error, along with doing some rethinking. What you should not do is to throw away your entire theology. This is especially important because of the very nature of theology: theologies are Man-made and therefore are imperfect and of course they contain error.
Those are the kinds of things I want to discuss with creationists. Of course, examining their young-earth claims with them is interesting, but they don't like that at all because of their mistaken beliefs about the consequences of their claims being wrong. I have found that with experience a creationist begins to realize that his claims are wrong or at least very weak and therefore learns to avoid discussing them.
| -- | Percy |
| | EvC Forum Director |
™ Version 4.2
(1)