Let me ask the general group…is debate about origins productive? With young-earthers or ID folks? When is it relationally destructive and when can it be constructive?
From YouTube I see Hugh Ross engaging both Ken Ham and Biologos. With Ham, Ross is doing his best to communicate but I cannot see how these two men are able to communicate. The listing of arguments and counterarguments and the back-and-forth seem to generate a lot of heat and little light. Is this what you have found in debate scenarios among Christians about origins? When has it come out otherwise?
I asked Ham a question last week at one of his presentations here in Dallas. At Tony Evans’ mostly African American church. It was the first time I have seen a creationist talk at a minority church.
I mentioned the chasm between creationists and science people like Bill Nye. Ham corrected me by saying it was SECULAR scientists on the other side of the chasm.
Hagar calls God “the God who sees.”
I have seen the private life of local biology professors who know what Ham teaches about them and evolution.
Dallas has a lot of culture-war going on from time to time. A number of churches and seminaries challenging the scientific consensus.
I don’t see how the churches are engaging the local professors in their isolation.
I think in many cases there is a growing chasm between the churches and their academic neighbors. Climate change has been added to the mix.
So what if there was a way to cross the chasm locally? I interviewed creationists for my dissertation committee. What if interviewing local professors about their lives and passion for science was brought to Ham by mail and local Christians?
Ham said he gets a lot of mail but told me he would try to read and respond.
I don’t see how else empathy can happen without storytelling crossing the chasm.