Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

"Goliath of GRAS"...still the one to beat!

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty50
    ... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/703 , mathewmaury , a supporter and promoter of the young-earth position, ...
    Message 1 of 5 , Dec 1 3:16 PM
      --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/703 ,
      "mathewmaury" <sqi7o0hh02@...>, a supporter
      and promoter of the young-earth position,
      suggested in March 2003:

      > The Gene/Robert Argument Supreme (GRAS) is
      >
      >> unanswerable,
      >> unrebutted, and
      >> victorious.

      --------------------------------------------------

      MathewMaury, of course, originated the name for the "Goliath of GRAS" argument. Here it is:

      MAJOR PREMISE:

      > IF (A) God's word (the text) says
      > everything began over a period
      > of six days, and
      >
      > IF (B) God's word (the text) is
      > interpreted by some to mean it
      > was six 24-hour days occurring
      > a few thousand years ago, and
      >
      > IF (C) there is empirical
      > evidence that some thing is
      > actually much older than a
      > few thousand years,
      >
      > THEN (D) the interpretation of
      > the text by some is wrong.

      MINOR PREMISE:

      > (A) God's word (the text) says
      > everything began over a period
      > of six days, and
      >
      > (B) God's word (the text) is
      > interpreted by some to mean it
      > was six 24-hour days occurring
      > a few thousand years ago, and
      >
      > (C) there is empirical evidence
      > that some thing is actually much
      > older than a few thousand years.
      >
      > CONCLUSION:
      >
      > (D) The interpretation of the
      > text by some is wrong.

      Stipulations:

      > "God's word" - communication from God
      > in words that are not wrong.

      > "Interpreted to mean" - what some think
      > the words mean and which thinking may
      > be wrong.

      > "Few thousand" - 100,000 or less.

      > "There is empirical evidence that some
      > thing(s) are more than a few thousand
      > years old" - some thing(s) is more than
      > a few thousand years old and we can so
      > determine from evidence and its
      > interpretation independent of the text
      > of God's word.

      Claims:

      (1)

      > The "Goliath of GRAS" argument is so constructed that
      > if its premises are true its conclusion will follow as
      > true therefrom (aka "logically valid").

      (2)

      > The "Goliath of GRAS" major premise is true, given the
      > stipulations and the force and effect of sound, biblical,
      > common sense reasoning.

      (3)

      > Young-earth creation-science promoters (aka Ken Ham,
      > Kent Hovind, et al) accept the truth of (A) & (B) of
      > the major and minor premises.

      (4)

      > Young-earth creation-science promoters (aka Ken Ham,
      > Kent Hovind, et al) reject the truth of (C) of the
      > major and minor premises.

      (5)

      > Young-earth creation-science promoters (aka Ken Ham,
      > Kent Hovind, et al) reject the truth of (C) of the
      > major and minor premises on the basis of their
      > interpretation of the text (e.g., God's word) as
      > opposed to the evidence and its interpretation
      > independent of God's word and its interpretation.

      (6)

      > Young-earth creation-science promoters (aka Ken Ham,
      > Kent Hovind, et al) reject the truth of (D), the
      > conclusion, on the basis of their interpretation of
      > the text (e.g., God's word) as opposed to the
      > evidence and its interpretation independent of God's
      > word and its interpretation.

      (7)

      > The findings proposed in (5) & (6) above help explain
      > why it is that young-earth creation-science promoters
      > have failed in their scientific pretensions and legal
      > challenges.

      As has been the case from the beginning, there is an open invitation to openly, honestly discuss the "Goliath of GRAS" and the claims made for it and its historic place in the popular public debate over the merits of young-earth creation-science and why the promoters of young-earth creation-science have failed in their scientific pretensions and legal challenges.

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.