[net.religion] In the Creationist Camp

lew@ihuxr.UUCP (Lew Mammel, Jr.) (03/10/84)

I attended the meeting of the Midwest Creation Fellowship which Steve
Collins posted an announcement for. The meeting was well attended,
but it was my impression that most of those present were members of
the congregation.

The main thing I noticed about the movie, "The World that Perished",
was its heavy religious emphasis. Descriptions of the flood were
punctuated by still shots of a Bible open to various verses, which
were recited by the narrator.  The last third of the movie was devoted
to establishing the analogy between the Flood and the Second Coming.
This included representations of the latter event in the form of burning
buildings collapsing etc. The movie closed with a shot of the door
of the ark slamming shut while the narrator exhorted the audience not to
miss the metaphorical boat of salvation.

The movie is evidently esoteric (look it up) material.  I just don't
see how Paul Dubuc can expect people to concentrate on the "scientific
portions" of creationism in the face of this kind of thing. I'll also
take the trouble to remind you of Larry Bickford's vehement denial that
creationism is essentially religious.

I did pick up some new points in the flood description. The "waters
above the firmament" mentioned in Genesis where explained to be
an enveloping vapor cloud, whose precipitation onto the earth started
the flood.  Due attention was also given to the "fountains of the deep".
The waters were described as running off into the newly created
ocean basins.

Also new to me was the suggestion that the animals on the ark might
have been made soporific by God as an aid to Noah.  In a similar
vein it was pointed out that God had caused the animals to come to
Noah in pairs, thus dismissing the problem of collection. A lot of
attention was given to a size calculation, but none to any question
of structural integrity. Here again, it was pointed out that the
construction was carried out under divine guidance.

Most conspicuously absent was any discussion of the dispersion of
the animals after landing.

The speaker began his discussion with a lengthy discussion of
tsunamis, storm surges, and tides, which drew heavily from
WAVES AND BEACHES by Willard Bascomb (By chance, a favorite of mine.)
There was heavy emphasis on the awesome power of these phenomena
as illustrated by various dramatic photographs. I couldn't really
figure what he was up to until he got to the punch line, which was
basically, "You can see that we have no problem accounting for the
geological record with these powerful forces."  I find it ironic
that he built his case so meticulously on present day phenomena.

A map showing the geographic regions of North America was shown
surrounded by about five hypothetical tsunami epicenters. Mention
was made of the St. Petersburg formation, which for some reason is a
creationist favorite. Also touched upon was the ambulatory sorting theory
of fossil strata.  I take it that this is what Ray Miller had in mind
when he wondered whether creationist critics were familiar with the
creationist thinking on this topic. I'll only comment that it is based
on a crude analogy between "high ground" and "higher strata" which makes
no physical sense whatsoever.

The speaker closed with an amazing Freudian slip. He concluded
that his arguments showed that, with regard to the Genesis account,
"... we can believe it, and we can stand it - stand ON it."
Remember this is a "former evolutionary geologist" speaking.

Another time he referred to the error of putting more faith in
science than in God.  This was ideologically inconsistent with
a diagram he showed which had science and religion, symbolized by a
Bible and a microscope, arrayed on the side of creation, as opposed
to a forlornly empty region labelled "evolution", which had only
personal prejudice to support it.

The session ran late, so questions were limited to those who hung
around. One older man asked about the Ice Ages. These are admitted
by creationists, but confined to a few hundred years after the flood.
This older fellow, being I imagine a good Baptist who happened to
have a fond knowledge of the Ice Ages, asked weren't they supposed
to have occurred 20 to 30 thousand years ago. ( He figured this
was the time of Noah.) The speaker replied that this time was based
on the assumption that events proceeded only as fast as they do now,
things were moving a lot faster then.

I imagined that this didn't really satisfy the questioner. To me,
the conflict he was experiencing was almost palpable, and a sad
thing to behold.

There was the expected amount of free and for sale literature
available. These were taken up quickly, including a number
of books at $4.50 each. Out of deference I waited till everybody
seemed to have gotten what they wanted and picked up three
pamphlets by Winkie Pratney, and a mimeographed Constitution
and list of coming lectures of the Midwest Creation Fellowship.

I'll note that the constitution contains the items:

	2. Basis for Membership: Belief in a literal 6-day Creation,
	a universal Flood, and Genesis 5 and 11 as constituting a
	real chronology which limits the age of the universe to
	a maximum of 10,000 years.

and:
	7. Inter-group relations: Although organizationally independent,
	the Midwest creation fellowship heartily endorses and supports
	the work of the Center for Scientific Creation, and regards
	our own work as complementary and supplementary to it.

and:
	9. Motto: "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that
	exalteth itself against the knowledge of God." II Corinthians 10:5

All in all, quite an experience. I may go again next month.

	Lew Mammel, Jr. ihnp4!ihuxr!lew