jeffma@tekgvs.UUCP (Jeff Mayhew) (01/31/84)
"But, speaking of "ad hominem polemics," what do you call accusing
someone of "double-talk, mis-quotation, mis-representation, and
outright fraud?" Isn't it "ad hominem" to impugn someone's
motives for asserting a given position?"
Gary Samuelson
Sorry, Gary. An ad hominem attack is one directed at the individual
making the statements, rather than at the statements. Example: "Nothing
he says can be trusted because he wears women's underwear."
Accusing someone of "double-talk, mis-quotation, mis-representation, and
outright fraud" are perfectly legitimate in an argument, so long as the
individual who is making the statement is willing to back up their
accusations. If someone says something which is inaccurate or deliberately
distorted in a self-serving way, there is nothing wrong with my pointing
it out. John Hobson followed up his statements with some legitimate
substantiations of his position. I can provide other blatant examples of
mis-quotation as well.
"Isn't it possible that Drs. Gish and Morris sincerely believe what
they say they believe? Or do you really think that they know that
creationism is false, and are deliberately trying to 'undermine
scientific facts and theories?'"
Gary Samuelson
Yes, Gary, I believe Morris and Gish sincerely believe their misguided
drivel. Let me give you some quotes by the "father of modern creationism,"
Henry Morris:
"As we have repeatedly stressed in our book, the real issue is not the
correctness of the interpretation of various details of the geological
data, but simply what God has revealed in His Word concerning these
matters." The Genesis Flood, p. xxvii
"As we have tried repeatedly to stress in the book, our specific
discussions of individual geologic problems are tentative and subject
to continuing re-evaluation with further study, but these problems
do not, and cannot be allowed to, raise questions concerning the basic
framework of Biblical revelation within which they must be understood."
The Genesis Flood, p. xxix
"Our main concern, as honest exegetes of the Word of God, must not be
to find ways of making the Biblical narratives conform to modern
scientific theories. Instead, our concern must be to discover exactly
what God has said in the Scriptures, being fully aware of the fact that
modern scientists, laboring under the handicap of non-Biblical presuppositions
(such as materialism, organic evolution, and uniformitarianism), are in
no position to give us an accurate reconstruction of the early history
of the earth and its inhabitants." The Genesis Flood, p. 62.
"After all, any real knowledge of origins or of earth history antecedent
to human historical records can only be obtained through divine revelation."
The Genesis Flood, p. 213.
"...the instructed Christian knows that the evidences for full divine
inspiration of Scripture are far weightier than the evidences for any fact
of science. When confronted with the consistent Biblical testimony to a
universal Flood, the believer must certainly accept it as unquestionably
true." The Genesis Flood, p. 118.
"Other things being equal, a person should be able to do a better job in
any course or at any task if he is a Christian than he could have before
becoming a Christian, since he now has greater resources and higher
motives than before." The Troubled Waters of Evolution, p. 178.
"If the scientific law of cause and effect means anything at all (and
all scientists use it), then one must recognize that an intelligible
universe suggests an Intelligence that caused the universe, and that
individual personalities in the universe imply that their First Cause
must be a Person." The Troubled Waters of Evolution, pp. 104-105.
"The idea of evolution is not merely a certain biological theory having
to do with men and monkeys, but is a complete world view, a philosophy
of life, the established religion of the state. Its pervasive influence
has penetrated every field of study and has provided the pseudo-scientific
basis of communism, fascism, racism, animalism, and all the other deadly
philosophies that trouble the world today."
The Troubled Waters of Evolution, p. 24.
"Assuming Satan to be the real source of the evolutionary concept, how
did it originate in his mind?" The Troubled Waters of Evolution, p. 75.
Sources are:
Morris, Henry M. "The Troubled Waters of Evolution." San Diego:
Creation-Life Publishers, 1977.
Morris, Henry M., and John C. Whitcomb, Jr. "The Genesis Flood: The
Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications." Philadelphia:
The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1961.
I think Morris means exactly what he says, and that's what concerns me
most.
Jeff Mayhew