The Atheist Jew Endorses Answers In Creation, Sort Of

Since I'm a believer that man is hardwired to readily accept the concept of God and the supernatural, I don't have a major problem with people who believe in God.....as long as they don't deny reality, history, and factual evidence to do so.

I'll argue with any believer if I'm confronted by someone who says there is a God, or if they say that Atheism is a religion or makes no sense. But that is the fighter in me.

It is the people who have to go out of their way to deny an old earth or deny evolution by trying to poke holes in a "scientific" manner that really bothers me (the wilfully ingnorant). It is those people who are the most intolerant too, because they think their religion is so special and the only way to go, and that you have to do this that and the other thing and believe this that or the other thing, or you will rot in hell.
I don't mind the few YECs who just admit that they believe in their bible and they don't try to argue why they are right scientifically (the honest wilful ignorant).

It looks like a group of Christians are fed up with YECs. They are embarrassments to 2007 humanity, and the people at Answers In Creation (Old Earth Ministries) have figured it out. The writers at this site give to YECs better than I ever could. Here is an exerpt from their FAQ page:

1. If you say it doesn’t matter what position you believe in (old or young), then why do you attack the young earth position?

There are two reasons why the young earth creation science position is criticized on this website. First and most important, there is a battle to be waged for people's souls. Countless people have abandoned the Christian church today, because they were told that the earth was young, and then after they studied the evidence, they saw that it was old. We seek to reach these people...the ones that have been cast out by young earth creationism. They need to understand that you can be a Christian, and believe that the earth is old. With this goal in mind, we gladly confront the false teachings of young earth creationism.
The second reason we confront the young earth position is because it is wrong. The earth is about 4.5 billion years old, and the universe more than 13 billion years old. The scientific evidence to support this claim is accepted by over 99.9 percent of all scientists.1 However, the young earth position teaches that the earth is only 6,000 years old. Because this is against all (100%) of the evidence from God’s creation, the young earth position is not true. Yes, even God's creation argues against young earth creationism. At this website, we seek to expose the young earth position for what it is, a false representation of science and truth. We encourage people to examine God's creation, so that they can discover the truth that the earth is old.
Because what they teach is not the truth, it must be confronted.

They have a page full of testimonials from those who used to believe in the Young Earth but changed their minds based on REAL EVIDENCE.

Their stance on evolution is pretty whacked, only because they understand how YEC's work when it comes to Young Earth "science." I think deep down, or even right under the surface, they KNOW evolution is fact:

4. Do you believe in evolution?

Answers In Creation does not believe in Theistic Evolution. However, there is no reason why Theistic Evolution should not be considered a viable alternative to any other form of creation belief. It is possible to be a Christian, believe in an inerrant Bible, and believe in Theistic Evolution. In fact, you can even be a fundamentalist and believe in evolution. You will see articles on Answers In Creation that are in support of Theistic Evolution. As valid brothers and sisters in Christ, we seek to aid them where we can.
Furthermore, the arguments used against Theistic Evolution by young earth (and old earth) ministries are well-countered by theistic evolutionists. There is a good chance that they are right!

I'm obviously ignoring the word "theistic" because I allow them the belief in God or Jesus' resurrection, as science cannot disprove a negative in these cases, and man is so easily duped by the idea of God, etc.

They lose me when it comes to the flood, as there is lots of evidence that a flood didn't affect ALL mankind, even it was localized (the localized part is the good part at least):

Do you believe in a global flood?

The flood of Noah was a local flood, however, it was universal in effect. God said he would wipe man from the face of the earth, and he did. All locations that were populated in Noah’s day were flooded. Please keep in mind that during Noah’s day, the people all stayed together in one geographic area, and they all spoke the same language (this was prior to the Tower of Babel). Thus, there was no need to flood the entire earth (nor is there any geological evidence of such a flood).
Does this mean the Bible is in error when it says the whole earth was flooded? No, the Bible is accurate. The Bible is written from the frame of reference of man. All the lands known to man were flooded, thus all of man's world was flooded. Noah, viewing the flood, would have claimed the whole world was flooded, even though most of it was not.

They really target the likes of Ken Ham and Kent Hovind. Here is a fairly recent article slamming Ham's book Lie: Evolution.

4. Animals were created as vegetarians. This claim is one that makes absolutely no sense when you consider the lengths to which young earth creationists have to go to in order to justify it. It is true that God addresses man and animals, and tells them to eat plants. This makes sense only if you consider that it is God’s directions for the Garden of Eden, which is the location this edict was given. The Garden was a vision of the new heaven and new earth, which contained no bloodshed. There is no reason so suspect that outside the Garden, life continued on as it had for millions of years. Also, many animals are uniquely designed as predators, and their digestive systems are designed to process meat. Young earth creationists explain this away by saying the curse changed animals...but then again, animals were not cursed.

OK, so it a bit of an apologist site, but it is a move in the right direction. It mostly takes fact and then changes the meanings of the words in the bible to fit the facts (I wonder why they can't do that regarding the Great Flood though).

Here is a paragraph that pretty much illustrates their attitude:

As a progressive creationist, I do not believe in theistic evolution. However, based on Ham’s discussion of 20 reasons against evolution, he presents no valid arguments against theistic evolution. If you prefer to believe in theistic evolution, you are free to continue to do so. One of the greatest evangelical theologians of the 20th century, C.S. Lewis, the author of the Chronicles of Narnia, was a theistic evolutionist. Nobody, not even young earth creationists, questions his devotion to God.

Not accepting evolution (even though they know it is true) allows them to still be intolerant:

"As a conservative Christian myself, I can honestly say that you can still have the same moral positions on abortion, homosexuality, and other issues, and believe that the earth is old."

I guess even if you are an Old Earth Christian, you still gotta hate something.

From Gershwin's Porgy and Bess. I was going to embed the Sammy Davis version from Youtube but it was incomplete.

IT AIN'T NECESSARILY SO

It ain't necessarily so, it ain't necessarily so.
De t'ings dat yo' li'ble to read in de Bible,
it ain't necessarily so.

Li'l David was small, but oh my, Li'l David was small, but oh my.
He fought big Goliath who lay down and dieth.
Li'l David was small, but oh my.

Oh, Jonah, he lived in de whale, oh, Jonah, he ived in de whale.
Fo' he made his home in dat fish's abdomen.
Oh, Jonah, he lived in de whale.

Li'l Moses was found in a stream, Li'l Moses was found in a stream.
He floated on water till Ole Pharoah's daughter
she fished him, she says, from that stream.

It ain't necessarily so, it ain't necessarily so.
Dey tell all you chillun de debble's a villun
but 'tain't necessarily so.

To get into Hebben don't snap for a sebben.
Live clean, don have no fault.
Oh, I takes dat gospel whenever it's pos ble
but wid a grain of salt.

Methus lah lived nine hundred years, Methus lah lived nine hundred years.
But who calls dat livin' when no gal will give in
to no man what's nine hundred years?

I'm preachin' dis sermon to show
it ain't nessa, ain't nessa, ain't nessa, ain't nessa,
ain't necessarily so.

- Ira Gershwin