Question for the lurking YECist

Even most young earth creationist agree that humans are mammals. They are we are mammals generally because mammals have fur, feed their young milk and are warm blooded vertebrates. But they don’t agree that these characteristics are a indicator of a basal form ( or even convergence ) but by design and so therefore humans are not any more closely related to chimps than to dogs or fish but that we are merely more similar in appearance.

If that’s true then how do the yecist know that a lion is more closely related to a domesticated house cat than to a wolf since they don’t believe biological and genetic similarities are a sign of a relationship?

2 Likes

They know because it is required to make the story of the global flood true, at least in their eyes.

3 Likes

My father denies evolution. A young earth creationist that takes the majority of the Bible literally.

One time I asked him, “Look at a Chimp, and then a human. Don’t you see how similar we look? How is that not evidence for sharing DNA?”

His response?
“Well, we have eyes, do we relate to a cat? We can walk, do we relate to a bear? God is mysterious, He can do anything, including making us look similar but not BE similar.”

I died inside. He accepts that we are mammals, and that other animals such as dogs descended from their ancestors of The Canidea, and that cats descended from theirs of the Felis Catus (I am not sure if I got these names right), but not that humans descended or evolved (I don’t understand evolution much) from The Ardipithecus, Australopithecus, and Paranthropus (I just googled which animals humans descended from, so I’m not sure if I’m right).

1 Like

I would not worry about it, let him believe what he wants. To deny it would mean to accept that what his mentors, his church, his tribe taught was false, and if it was false, how much more might be also false. His situation is not that different that yours, he just comes to it from the other side. So long as you can meet in the middle, that is what is important.

4 Likes

They believe in “kinds” which can mean whatever they want it to mean.

2 Likes

To an extent I agree with your father, its just that my conclusion god can give us authority without having to make us incredibly unique, juste like we human give authority to fellow humans,

Although their is a strong argument that humans are remarkably unique compared to other living things.

True, but it’s more of the fact that he just doesn’t ever seem to want to even hear about it. Like he tries to shut it out as much as possible because he believes something else.

Eventually, we discover that we are not much different than our fathers. Both for better and for worse.

As Phil noted, I wouldn’t sweat too much over it. His faith is more important than his correct discernments of science. It’s those who want to thrust their “scientific” discernments into the midst of other people’s theologies that we most fuss about around here. And “they” will try to turn that right around back at us by insisting: isn’t that exactly what you all are doing!? And the answer is a qualified ‘yes’ - but mostly: ‘no’. We don’t think theology comes from science. But if theology is going to try to take science into account (not a bad thing), then we insist that it at least be correct and honest science according to the best current consensus. Because, you know, we happen to believe that theology ought to be the most correct and honest theology it can be, not discarding the use of the minds and sight with which God has gifted humankind.

2 Likes

That was my thought too. Essentially they allow themselves the right intuition but deny the implications that follow from them. As @jpm says they are trying to preserve other beliefs this way. They aren’t against the truth they just worry more important truths may become victims. Somehow they need to recognize what language is and how it works in order to hold all the truth.

1 Like

That a good point actually.
We don’t have issues with YEC because we think their beliefs are a major problem to be Christian. Being EC is not a requirement to be saved. We have issues with them because they insist on YEC being a requirement to be saved and raising the bar to come to Christ Which is the opposite of what we should do.

In my experience, the common, everyday YEC has little interest in the actual science. The conflict between the scientific implications of YEC and what we have discovered in biology, geology, and astronomy isn’t something they see or deal with. Most scientific evidence is not understood, and almost immediately handwaved away.

However, there are Christians who do educate themselves in science, and they come face to face with the massive problems within YEC. They feel like they have to lie to themselves in order to accept YEC, and this is simply a no-go for many Christians. This is made even worse by what you discuss, the fact that many YEC’s claim that their beliefs are a required tenet of Christianity.

Perhaps if we started at the basic human level of where people are starting from it may be easier to discuss and understand why people take such different paths.

2 Likes

That reminds me of a PM exchange (in which I was more gracious than in some I have initiated :woozy_face:) with a YEC the other day, and included my canned bit about truth and reality that regulars will have seen before:

 
Some will also have seen what I concluded with:

:grin: I haven’t heard back… here’s hoping I may have gotten through to him.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6

This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.