bill@utastro.UUCP (William H. Jefferys) (02/28/85)
It has been pointed out by several people that it is difficult to determine
exactly what the Creationists on this net actually believe. Even Paul Dubois
admitted to a failure to state his real position clearly. In order to
focus this issue, I present here the actual text of the statement that an
applicant for membership in the Creation Research Society (CRS) must
subscribe to. The CRS is based in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
"1. The Bible is the written word of God, and because we believe it to be
inspired thruout, all of its assertions are historically and
scientifically true in all the original autographs. To the students of
nature, this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual
presentation of simple historical truths.
"2. All basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct
creative acts of God during Creation Week as described in Genesis.
Whatever biological changes have occurred since Creation have
accomplished only changes within the original created kinds.
"3. The great Flood described in Genesis, commonly referred to as the
Noachian Deluge, was an historical event, worldwide in its extent and
scope.
"4. Finally, we are an organization of Christian men of science, who
accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The account of the special
creation of Adam and Eve as one man and one woman, and their subsequent
Fall into sin, is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a
Savior for all mankind. Therefore, salvation can only come thru
accepting Jesus Christ as Savior."
My questions to the Creationists are, first, would you be willing to sign
the above statement? Secondly, if not, which parts of it do you object to,
and why (be specific)? Finally, how would you change the statement to
make it acceptable to you?
Now, I know that there are Creationists who will not agree to all of these
statements. On the other hand, the CRS is one of the two major Creationist
organizations in the United States, and it is fair to assume, absent
contrary evidence, that its official position closely approximates that of the
vast majority of Creationists, including those in this newsgroup. Am I
wrong? If so, let's hear it.
--
"Men never do evil so cheerfully and so completely as when they do so from
religious conviction." -- Blaise Pascal
Bill Jefferys 8-%
Astronomy Dept, University of Texas, Austin TX 78712 (USnail)
{allegra,ihnp4}!{ut-sally,noao}!utastro!bill (uucp)
bill%utastro.UTEXAS@ut-sally.ARPA (ARPANET)larryg@teklds.UUCP (Larry Gardner) (03/06/85)
As a Creationist I completely!! agree with the statements from CSR. I wouldn't subtract or add a thing!! karen
mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) (03/06/85)
In article <408@teklds.UUCP> larryg@teklds.UUCP (Karen Clark) writes: > As a Creationist I completely!! agree with the statements from CSR. > I wouldn't subtract or add a thing!! Funny, they add or subtract things all the time. -- Mike Huybensz ...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
dimitrov@csd2.UUCP (Isaac Dimitrovsky) (03/12/85)
[]
> 2. The hebrew word "beget" implies blood line but not specifically "son".
OK, I'll bite. Where in the bible (I presume you are referring to the
Old Testament) is the hebrew word for beget (holid) used to refer to
something other than a direct parent-child relation?