Post by rgrove on Jun 9, 2005 11:32:11 GMT -5
This is a nice article featured today at Answers In Genesis by Ken Ham. The article addresses where the real problem exists between evolutionists and creationists. Their presuppositions. Ken Ham regularly uses a presuppositional approach in looking at the creation/evolution debate in his works. It's especially evident in his book "Evolution: The Lie". From the outset the evolutionist will always try to force the creationist to submit to their presuppositions of their worldview. The creationist should not allow this to happen and this article discusses why that's so important. The two most important Christian presuppositions that can't be compromised are:
1) Facts are NOT neutral.
2) Truth CANNOT be determined independant from God.
Here is a good snippet to see where the article is going:
What's the Best "Proof" of Creation?
"Creationists and evolutionists, Christians and non-Christians all have the same evidence—the same facts. Think about it: we all have the same earth, the same fossil layers, the same animals and plants, the same stars—the facts are all the same.
The difference is in the way we all interpret the facts. And why do we interpret facts differently? Because we start with different presuppositions. These are things that are assumed to be true, without being able to prove them. These then become the basis for other conclusions. All reasoning is based on presuppositions (also called axioms). This becomes especially relevant when dealing with past events."
Yours In Christ,
Ron
1) Facts are NOT neutral.
2) Truth CANNOT be determined independant from God.
Here is a good snippet to see where the article is going:
What's the Best "Proof" of Creation?
"Creationists and evolutionists, Christians and non-Christians all have the same evidence—the same facts. Think about it: we all have the same earth, the same fossil layers, the same animals and plants, the same stars—the facts are all the same.
The difference is in the way we all interpret the facts. And why do we interpret facts differently? Because we start with different presuppositions. These are things that are assumed to be true, without being able to prove them. These then become the basis for other conclusions. All reasoning is based on presuppositions (also called axioms). This becomes especially relevant when dealing with past events."
Yours In Christ,
Ron