By Dr. Ritchie:
POSTSCRIPT
Several years ago, in the Sydney Morning Herald, as one geologist to another, I publicly challenged Dr Snelling (the young-earth creationist version) to a public debate, before our geological peers, on a subject close to his heart - Noah’s Flood - The Geological Case For and Against.
I’ve repeated the challenge several times since then and it still stands.
For reasons best known only to himself, Dr Snelling has declined to defend the creationist cause.
In the light of the above I suggest the reason is obvious. In his heart, and as a trained geologist, he knows that the young-earth model is a load of old codswallop and is totally indefensible.
Why do you use quaint, outmoded Biblical idiomatic expressions to expose Dr. Snellings' purported hypocrisy and intellectual and moral turpitude?
When you refer to the heart you are obviously not referring to the hollow, muscular organ that pumps blood through the body of a vertebrate animal by contracting and relaxing. But to what, then, are you referring? Are you referring to the repository of Dr. Snellings' deepest and sincerest feelings and beliefs? The vital center and source of his being, emotions, and sensibilities?
That would seem to be the case, but from an evolutionist standpoint, as far as I can tell, there is no such thing as a repository of one's deepest and sincerest feelings and beliefs, or any such thing as a vital center and source of one's being and sensibilities. These are all nothing but epiphenomenon of physico/chemical reactions that developed randomly over eons without any purpose, goal or meaning, resulting in among other things, vertebrate animals like Dr. Snelling.
So for you to presuppose that there is something wrong with certain physical processes and chemical reactions is incoherent from an evolutionary perspective. It doesn't make any sense to presuppose purpose where there is none. There is nothing wrong (or right for that matter) about physical processes that developed out of nothing but chance/necessity.
The bottom line is that for you to say anything that even begins to be coherent about the duplicity, hypocisy and overall general wickedness of Dr. Snellings' heart, it requires that you take on presuppositions that you abhor, making your criticism of Dr. Snelling about as futile, self-defeating and groundless as a complaint about the moral depravity of the central core or innermost physical part of a magma flow.
Exposing Dr. Snellings' purported moral depravity would, however, at least begin to make sense from a Biblical, Creationist presupposition:
Bible DictionaryHeart
According to the Bible, the heart is the centre not only of spiritual activity, but of all the operations of human life. "Heart" and "soul" are often used interchangeably (Deut. 6:5; 26:16; comp. Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30, 33), but this is not generally the case. The heart is the "home of the personal life," and hence a man is designated, according to his heart, wise (1 Kings 3:12, etc.), pure (Ps. 24:4; Matt. 5:8, etc.), upright and righteous (Gen. 20:5, 6; Ps. 11:2; 78:72), pious and good (Luke 8:15), etc. In these and such passages the word "soul" could not be substituted for "heart." The heart is also the seat of the conscience (Rom. 2:15). It is naturally wicked (Gen. 8:21), and hence it contaminates the whole life and character (Matt. 12:34; 15:18; comp. Eccl. 8:11; Ps. 73:7). Hence the heart must be changed, regenerated (Ezek. 36:26; 11:19; Ps. 51:10-14), before a man can willingly obey God. The process of salvation begins in the heart by the believing reception of the testimony of God, while the rejection of that testimony hardens the heart (Ps. 95:8; Prov. 28:14; 2 Chr. 36:13). "Hardness of heart evidences itself by light views of sin; partial acknowledgment and confession of it; pride and conceit; ingratitude; unconcern about the word and ordinances of God; inattention to divine providences; stifling convictions of conscience; shunning reproof; presumption, and general ignorance of divine things."
You cannot consistently object to Dr. Snelling trying to have something both ways while trying to have it both ways yourself.
Cordially,