My church seems to be endorsing YEC. How should I approach church leaders?

Faith & Science Conversation
29

Absolutely true; we shouldn’t make mountains out of molehills. Is the field trip a threat? No, of course not. But that’s not the real issue I’m raising with leaders of my church.

I believe we have to consider the harmfulness of the YEC movement. I believe YECists not only reject science (if it was only that, it would probably just be irritating), but that they actually deter others (including current Christians) away from the Christian faith by their attitude toward criticism, misleading statements, and other embarrassing behavior (like referring to those who disagree as “Christians” in quotes to imply a nominal and/or disingenuous faith).

IMHO, this is worth fighting about. It must be done in the right way, of course, hence my original question. Anyway I do appreciate your insight!

2 Likes
30

I’ve made a number of replies on this forum which are pretty direct in addressing the many misrepresentations of YEC, but I figure that people who post here are consciously entering the fray and many are actively sorting through the issues. At the local church, my own tendency is to try and let it slide, or state my position while refraining from being drawn into debate. You may find that some are struggling to reconcile their faith with science, and they would probably be happy that they are not alone, so you can be an encouragement there.

In the end, you will have to do what you think is right, but it may be prudent to allow yourself a bit of extra time to evaluate your motivations, decide on the best approach, and what outcome may be desirable and realistic.

3 Likes
31

You cannot change them under any circumstances @GhostlyFigure02. For you are a reasonable man. Only support, with your money and time, any work they do for the underprivileged, any real charity; the true, social gospel. Everything else is a waste of you.

1 Like
32

(Would have replied sooner but the forum locked me out for a while as a new user.)

You’re absolutely right, @rsewell. I’m probably coming across more… aggressive, maybe? on this forum because I feel like I can speak freely among people that tend to agree with me on the topic at hand. In real life I’m pretty good at challenging people without making them feel attacked or sometimes even realizing that I’m disagreeing with them.

You can read in my original post that I went through my own struggle for reconciliation of faith and science, so I’m respectful of where others are on their ongoing journeys. I certainly appreciate your advice, and can assure you I will approach the church leaders with humility, kindness, and understanding.

3 Likes
33

Hi @GhostlyFigure02,

My own concerns about young earth creationism are not around the age of the earth itself, but about what gets presented as evidence for it. Science is a subject that needs to be approached in an honest and responsible manner and shouldn’t be treated lightly, because if you start approaching one area of science in a sloppy, dishonest or conspiratorial manner, people will start approaching other areas of science in a sloppy, dishonest or conspiratorial manner as well, and in some cases that can put people’s lives in danger. We’ve seen that a lot with covid-19, where hostility to masks and vaccines has ended up killing a lot of people unnecessarily. YECs seem to be particularly predisposed to believing conspiracy theories about such matters.

The Bible verse that I quote in particular in this regard is Deuteronomy 25:13-16:

¹³Do not have two differing weights in your bag — one heavy, one light. ¹⁴Do not have two differing measures in your house — one large, one small. ¹⁵You must have accurate and honest weights and measures, so that you may live long in the land the Lᴏʀᴅ your God is giving you. ¹⁶For the Lᴏʀᴅ your God detests anyone who does these things, anyone who deals dishonestly.

What this basically means is that when discussing science, there are rules to be followed and standards to be maintained. (Basically, mathematics and measurement). Any creation model, any interpretation of Genesis 1, any challenge to the scientific consensus on the age of the earth or evolution needs to obey these rules, otherwise it isn’t honest.

The point I would make to your pastor is that even if scientists have got it all wrong, and even if the earth really is six thousand years old after all, the Internet is awash with arguments to that effect that fall so far short of these rules and standards that they are an outright mockery. Anyone taking a stand on such issues needs to make sure that they know what they are talking about and that they understand the subject matter sufficiently to be able to filter out the bad arguments from the good ones, because otherwise they aren’t going to be upholding the Bible; instead, they will be undermining it. It’s also far too easy for well meaning but badly informed Christians to charge into the debate with all guns blazing only to find themselves quickly getting waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of their depth.

So rather than saying that the earth is x years old or that y evolved from z, get over it, just caution people that they need to know what they are talking about before trying to tackle complex technical subjects such as these. Are there any good arguments for a young earth, your pastor may ask? So far, I am yet to see one.

3 Likes
34

4 posts were split to a new topic: Why do people oppose YEC?

35

Here’s an update for anyone interested in the outcome of the meeting I had with the trip organizer:

He was a YECist as I suspected, but more of the lean-that-way-after-hearing-the-elevator-pitch variety than the hardcore literal-is-the-only-valid-interpretation variety. He was very open to my perspective and asked a lot of questions about my opposition to YEC. After some lengthy introductions, we touched on the merits of YEC vs old-earth science and how the church might provide a vehicle for education of at least the church leaders if not an offering of something the general congregation can participate in.

I did actually find out yesterday that the tour company has direct ties to AiG, so I gave the trip organizer several examples from the AiG website showing their dismissive, condescending, legalistic attitude toward Christians that disagree with them. The tour company’s website is fairly innocuous in comparison, but they do claim their tour presents a “biblical creation perspective,” as if the Bible can only be interpreted in the YEC way. I object to that terminology, but I didn’t find anything mean-spirited like on the AiG site.

In the end I reiterated that my request was two-fold: 1) that the church leaders hear out a science-based Christian viewpoint, and 2) that they reexamine their implicit connection to AiG by way of encouraging the patronizing of the tour company (as a response to some concerns in this thread, I verified that the church/tour relationship consists solely of advertisement of the church’s trip series on the church’s own website, nothing directly financial in nature).

The trip organizer is going to take my concerns to the head pastor and we’ll see what happens from there. Thanks to all who chimed in. I’m really glad I posted here! It was very helpful.

Edit: “other Christians” => “Christians that disagree with them”

13 Likes
36

Great. That’s a better outcome than many of us might have anticipated, having dealt with many ‘militant’ YECs in our travels.

2 Likes
38

I would suggest that you pray first. Then if you decide to have a conversation with your leader/, sit listen, and ask questions about why they hold that position.

Open dialogue is preferred always. No debate.

1 Like
39

Well done for taking the issue up with leadership, it’s not an easy thing.

Reading through your initial post I was reminded of the fact that many churches teach all sorts of things implicitly as “biblical” which aren’t in their statements of faith. For example, a number of times during the Covid pandemic it has been said from the pulpit at my church that God created a perfect world and that viruses etc were all the result of sin and the fall. This ‘cosmic’ fall type theology isn’t in our SoF, but it was presented as a clear biblical teaching so that it became a sort of “assumed” belief of the church. I think this happens with all sorts of stuff and that leaders need to do a better job of helping church members see the legitimacy of different views on secondary matters.

Anyway, hopefully you can be a force for change whichever way things go so that multiple viewpoints on secondary matters are given a good hearing in your church.

3 Likes
40

That’s all done already – see my update.

That’s ok as a starting point when coming forward about an issue, but not as a general rule. I would rephrase your last sentence to something like “Debate only in the appropriate setting.”

41

That’s what I’m shooting for! I actually have a meeting with the head pastor on Monday so we’ll see where it goes from there. Thanks for your example about the “assumed” belief – that’s good to keep in mind.

3 Likes
42

Wow!! That is QUITE the story!!

1 Like
43

Not surprising that they do this. They believe the bible is God’s word of truth and want to adhere to that no matter what. It does say plainly in Genesis 1, Exodus 20:8-11 and Exodus 31:17 that God created everything in 6 normal human understandable days. So that’s what they believe is true - God said it!
Now, notice how you want to completely reject their interpretation of scripture!!! Doesn’t that strike you as ironic, given your lament against AIG and others? You want to enforce your interpretation of scripture on them - why is that? Who says your interpretation is correct? Who is the arbiter?

Man, I just have to ask this - are you a born-again follower of Christ?

44

I guess before answering the question I’ll wait for you to explain to me why you think it’s a necessary question. Any particular reason on why I would not be based off of what you just pasted?

45

It should also be noted that the other persons statement went over your head. The response was that AIG calls anyone who does not believe as them a heretic. As in they want you to be dumb and believe dumb stuff and if you’re like , “ no I have at least an 8th grade understanding of science “ they get mad and want you to have like a failing 3rd graders sense of science.

So as a evolutionary creationist I don’t think young earth theists are heretics I just think they are very uneducated when it comes to science.

47

Can you point me to a video or writ in which AIG actually calls different believers heretics?
As for what they want you to believe - I think they simply want you to stop swallowing the billions of years hook, line and stinker and see an alternative approach. You might see it as “dumb stuff”, I see well-qualified scientists putting their research results in lay-man’s terms - and if you want the meat - go read the scientific paper yourself - after all - they did get their qualifications at a normal so-called secular university - at least most of them that I know of.

48

There is an alternative you know. If you find out your pastor is a staunch YEC then It’s that you simply live with it. You have your view, they might differ from you on that issue. Tolerance is the key word here - just as they would be tolerating your viewpoint - even though they might wish you to see it their way!!!
On the other hand if it really, truly bothers you that much then it would be best to simply go look for another church where they love evolution - problem solved. You’ll be much happier there rather then starting an acrimonious world-view war and causing a lot of harm.
You can always go and visit your old friends and families now and again in the old church.

49

If someone scientifically attentive to God’s creation is asked to believe the equivalent (in their ears) of: “the sky is not blue”, then reality becomes the arbiter for them. When the best responses they get are essentially: “that’s only one interpretation”, “Did you know that a lot of Marxists also thought the sky is blue?” or “well, stop looking up” … they usually end up coming to their own conclusions about all that.

3 Likes
50

Uh, this?

If they want us to stop “swallowing billions of years hook, line and sinker and see an alternate approach,” then their alternative approach must consist of honest reporting and honest interpretation of accurate information, because that is what the Bible demands. Science has rules and honesty has rules, and if AIG want to challenge the scientific consensus that the earth is 4.5 billion years old then they must do so within the constraints of those rules.

Thus far, the “alternative approach” that they present does not even acknowledge the rules, let alone stick to them. What are the rules, you may ask? Start here:

2 Likes