Greene's Creationism Truth Filter  
 Essays & Articles Page 
 Home Page 
The Best of Steve Heiden
      or
Discussing Creationism
Using My "Steve Heiden" Persona

Sections:
Some Fallacies of Young Earth Creationism - 10/24/01
A Dangerous Implication of Young Earth Creationism - 10/26/01
The Full-Grown Theory - 6/9/01, 6/14/01, & 6/15/01
Ancient world is sound doctrine, because it's true - 7/5/01
Age of the earth, got my soda... - 7/7/01, 7/20/01
Fossils, Adam, and Death - 7/8/01, 7/9/01, 7/12/01, 7/13/01, & 7/16/01
Irrational Emotional Prejudice Against Science - 3/30/01, 3/31/01, 4/2/01, & 4/5/01
Evolutionary Science - 4/7/01, 4/9/01, 4/11/01, 4/12/01, 4/13/01, & 4/17/01
Clues for Better Biblical Hermeneutics - 11/25/01
Was Lightspeed Millions of Times Faster? - 4/1/02 & 4/2/02
The Emptiness of Creationist Rhetoric - 10/27/01, 11/1/01, 11/6/01 & 11/7/01
The Apparent Age Concept - 10/27/01 to 11/21/01 (21 posts)
Humphreys Cosmology, Another Wrong Argument - 10/26/01, 10/29/01, & 10/31/01
The Waters Above the Firmament - 3/19/02 to 3/22/01 (17 posts)
In April of 2001, I was personally invited by the owner/moderator of a discussion group to discuss the general subject of young earth creationism in his discussion group. As it turned out, he was not aware of the fact that I was an atheist. As preface to my discussion of creationism in his group, in my introductory comments about myself I mentioned that I was an atheist. This discussion group owner then promptly banned me from his group.

Now, I realize that irrational prejudice against atheists runs pretty high among such people, but this seemed rather ridiculous to me. Many creationists have such anti-atheist prejudice that they even use the subject of God's existence solely as a diversionary tactic to cover the fact that they are intentionally ignoring the factual errors that have been pointed out in their empirical arguments (such as, say, the moon recession argument). It has always been fascinating to me how so many of these people think so irrationally that the objective facts about the real world are somehow supposed to change willy-nilly depending on what a person's perspective is. If you're an atheist, then the earth orbits the sun, but if you are a creationist, then the relevant empirical details on this matter are supposed to somehow be magically different. What really gets me is not that some people push this completely irrational approach, but that so many other people actually buy it. (Richard Dawkins, I suppose, would point to this as evidence of the corrupt nature of the memes related to religious thought!)

My experience in April, 2001, was by no means unique. I've been in discussions in other YEC-related discussion groups, that didn't ban me merely for being an atheist, and I had to deal with constant barrages of anti-atheist rhetoric from various individuals. As if whether a person believes in the existence of God or not somehow magically alters the factual details relevant to whether or not SN1987A actually exploded about 168,000 years ago.

What this shows is that the YEC mindset is deeply enmeshed with an irrational prejudice. In the place of rational consideration of the details relevant to a particular matter, to such Christians all one has to do is to say, "This idea is atheistic," and all further attempts to discuss the issue rationally, on the basis of the relevant facts, becomes futile, because the prejudicial emotion switch has been triggered.

But on this particular occasion in April, 2001, I came up with a different idea. I decided that I would still discuss the subject, and that I would do it in such a way as to eliminate the anti-atheist prejudice by creating an evangelical Christian persona, and then discuss the various issues that came up from the perspective of this persona. This was the birth of the character known as Steve Heiden.

I used the character of Steve Heiden for a little over a year, and I even branched him out into a few other discussion groups besides that first one, though I carried out the vast bulk of discussion as Steve Heiden in the first group. But at the end of May, 2002, I chose to bring Steve Heiden to an end. Carrying on discussions both as Steve Heiden and as myself was becoming very time consuming (plus I wanted to take a summer vacation break from discussion groups!).

Below, for your examination, I have copied the final post that I made to that discussion group, in which I revealed who Steve Heiden really was and what I had done and why.

And now that I've brought my Steve Heiden character to an end, I will be adding to this website posts to discussion groups that I wrote as Steve Heiden, which I think contain discussion of creationism-related issues that may be useful to others. I just have to ask you to keep in mind that when I wrote as Steve Heiden, I was writing from the perspective one would have to take as an evangelical Christian who respected the facts about God's World as much as God's Word.

Todd S. Greene
June 26, 2002


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BereanSpirit/message/56243

From: Steve Heiden
Date: 5/28/02
Subject: Toto pulls aside the curtain

Hi, BereanSpirit readers.

In The Wizard of Oz, there's a scene toward the end of the movie
where as the main characters (Dorothy, Scarecrow, Tin Man, Lion) are
meeting the Great Wizard (a giant flaming head) in the great throne
room, Dorothy's little dog, Toto, grabs the edge of a curtain on a
booth toward the back and side of the room and starts pulling the
curtain aside, revealing a man in the booth manipulating various
controls and levers on a control panel. It turns out that this man
has faked the Great Wizard of Oz, that the Wizard of Oz is just a
man -- the man behind the curtain.

The same is true of Steve Heiden. Steve is nothing more than a
persona that I have invented for a particular purpose. Now this
explanation is going to be a little convolutated, so pay attention.
My purpose in inventing this persona is so that as this persona I can
pursue discussions of certain subjects for which a great deal of
irrational prejudice surrounds them, but merely by altering the
perception of who it is who is presenting the information I present
and discuss I am able to eliminate most (though not all) of this
irrational prejudice.

Please let me tell you the specific parameters of Steve Heiden,
keeping in mind that he is only a character I have invented. Steve is
a Christian who was raised in the Church of Christ. Steve was
baptized into Christ many, many years ago. Steve believes that the
Bible is inspired by God (but not the naive, dictation-style, view of
that doctrine), and he believes in the doctrine of biblical inerracy
(but not the naive view of that doctrine), and he makes all of his
arguments in discussion from this perspective. (If you don't believe
me now, after learning what you learn in this post, feel free to go
back and check. I have been most diligent to keep this perspective
and discussion as consistent as I possibly can.) Steve lives in the
Phoenix, Arizona area. (This is where I would like to live, but
don't.)

Compare the persona of Steve Heiden to what is actually true about
me: I was raised in the Church of Christ. I was baptized into Christ
in 1972. My father was a minister in the COC from 1973 until he
retired from preaching in 1990. (He attended the Preston Road School
of Preaching in the early 1970s, in Dallas, Texas, under Eldred
Stevens.) I left the church in the middle 1980s over serious
doctrinal disagreements. I left Christianity altogether within a
couple of years, because I could no longer accept the idea that the
Bible was written by anyone other than human beings. (This had as
much to do with Old Testament theology and events as with anything
else.) I live in the Grand Rapids, Michigan area.

My very first posts to the BereanSpirit list were actually these:

Creationism Discussion - A Preface / April 18, 2001
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BereanSpirit/message/22128

CREAT - The Antiquity of The Universe / Apr 18, 2001
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BereanSpirit/message/22129

Al Maxey promptly banned me from the BereanSpirit list, because of
the fact that I'm an atheist. However, it was Al who had invited me
to the group specifically to discuss creationism, especially the
subject of the antiquity of the universe and the earth, so I didn't
realize there was a big problem. In fact, I was very explicit about
the fact that I was not on the BereanSpirit list for the purpose of
discussing atheism but for the purpose of discussing the subject of
the antiquity of the universe and the earth. (And, for those who will
note it, this is exactly what I have done!)

I'm not absolutely sure, but I think my first post to BereanSpirit as
Steve Heiden were these rather innocuous posts

Re: CREAT - The Antiquity of The Universe / April 19, 2001
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BereanSpirit/message/22272
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BereanSpirit/message/22336

in response to some comments by Christopher Sharp. You'll note that
as Steve Heiden, I was quick to make comments that in effect
distanced myself from myself, so to speak, so I don't think it's any
surprise that I was able to slip under the radar right away.

I had no idea that Marion Fox was going to show up on this list. I
consider that a genuine bonus that I happened to be around when he
did. In fact, I was almost ready to wind up Steve Heiden's
participation in the BereanSpirit list when the announcement was made
that Marion Fox was going to show up, so I stuck around for a while.
Now that summer is here, Steve Heiden must take his leave.

There may be some concern about how much I may have deceived people
regarding the subject of antiquity itself that I have discussed, so
please let me explain aspects of this in further detail.

In regard to particular aspects of scientific information, and in
regard to the process of scientific inquiry and investigation in
general, you can rest most assured that I have diligently endeavored
to be as accurate as I can possibly be with respect to what I know.
There is absolutely nothing about playing the character of Steve
Heiden that has altered that in any way.

In regard to the Bible and biblical interpretation, I have tried to
be careful to quote appropriate biblical texts along the way. While
the points that I've made regarding the Bible, biblical hermeneutics,
and specific interpertations do not not of course actually represent
my own view, I have worked most diligently to argue in a manner
completely consistent with, as I mentioned above, the perspective of
the character of Steve Heiden in believing that the Bible is inspired
by God and in believing the doctrine of biblical inerracy. There are
many Christians who do in fact hold the perspective that the
character of Steve Heiden has represented, and I have tried to
mention many examples of them in many of my posts (such as John
Clayton, Hill Roberts, J. D. Thomas, Batsell Barrett Baxter,
Alexander Campbell, Glenn Morton, Davis A. Young, Howard J. Van Till,
Donald Stoner, Kenneth Miller, Francisco Ayala, Charles Hodge, and so
many others). Some of these old-earthers are BereanSpirit members,
such as David Mathews, Scott Tucker, and Al Maxey (the difference
being that they are real, while Steve Heiden is not). There is one
important distinction, being that among Christians who accept the
empirical fact that the universe and the earth are ancient, there
are "old earth" Christians who accept biological evolution and those
who do not (e.g., while Hill Roberts accepts the fact that the
universe and earth are ancient, he doesn't not accept biological
evolution). So there are many "old-earthers" who are *not* theistic
evolutionists. Some YECs have this very irritating habit of being
incapable of keeping this distinction in mind. (No one is so blind as
he who purposely chooses not to see!) In my discussion as Steve
Heiden, when I have discussed biblical interpretation I have done so
in a manner consistent with this perspective of a conservative, or
evangelical, Christian who believes that the Bible is inspired by God
and who believes that God's Word is without error (even while humans
misunderstand and do not fully comprehend God's Word). The other part
of this conservative theology is that there is also the truth of
God's World, and that since truth cannot contradict itself, God's
Word and God's World cannot contradict each other. (Marion Fox
himself made this very argument in chapter 2 of his book, even while
in his further discussion he chose to ignore the argument.)

I'm not pointing this out because I myself believe this, because I
personally do not accept the belief that the Bible is God's Word
(even though I used to). I'm simply pointing out that in my persona
as Steve Heiden, I intentionally argued in a manner consistent with
such a belief, because the purpose of the character of Steve Heiden
was to represent a conservative, or evangelical, Christian who
accepts the belief that the Bible is God's Word and who accepts the
empirical facts of God's World about the antiquity of the universe
and the earth. The perspective of the character of Steve Heiden also
happens to be the perspective that I used to have many years ago.

I have wasted a good deal of time discussing the subject of the
antiquity of the earth with people who are so blinded by irrational
prejudice that they cannot see past the fact of my being an atheist.
This irrationality destroys their ability to even consider the facts
of the matter. When I discuss the subject through the persona of
Steve Heiden, this removes the immediate basis for this irrationality
when "Steve Heiden" is discussing the antiquity of the universe and
the earth, because "Steve Heiden" is a Christian, not an atheist. (I
swear, I have been in some discussion forums where some of the
Christians wrote almost every post spewing forth prejudicial rhetoric
about atheism and anything non-YEC, and this made trying to have any
reasonable discussion on the subject almost impossible. Christians
should know better, but many Christians refuse to follow their own
Christian morality on this because the severity of their prejudice
has destroyed their rationality.) Indeed, we have seen in the cases
of Keith Sisman and Marion Fox the purposeful promotion of the
prejudicial rhetoric that Christians who disagree with YEC
are "implicit atheists" or are "siding with atheism."

Well, gee, here's the way this atheist -- who used to be a Christian
-- sees it: If accepting truths about the real world really did make
a person an atheist, then what is the proper conclusion? Is the
proper conclusion to reject truths about the real world because you
don't feel like accepting them, because they are too uncomfortable,
because you don't like the consequences of the truth? This is an
absurd position, and I find it amazing that Marion Fox, who
represents himself as a good logician, would have such a completely
illogical foundation. Whether you like the consequences or not, this
does not alter the truth one wit. The truth is what it is, whether
you like it or not.

I am *not* arguing that accepting the empirical facts about the
antiquity of the universe and the earth logically requires you to be
an atheist. In fact, I think this is a false argument. I'm simply
pointing out that even if it did require (logically) you to be an
atheist, then you have certainly not presented an argument against
antiquity, but have actually argued that people should be atheists,
since it is a direct observational fact that the universe is ancient.
Of course, people who are guided by emotional prejudice
(irrationality) rather than reason will refuse to see this, but by
their behavior they themselves have removed themselves from rational
discussion of the subject, and they themselves have shown that they
are not genuinely interested in truth-seeking.

I would also refer you to the post I made on Oct. 26, 2001, as Steve
Heiden:

A Dangerous Implication of YEC
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BereanSpirit/message/37224

If the Bible really genuinely does teach that the universe and the
earth did not exist more than about 6,000 years ago, then the YECs
agree with me, the atheist, that God is not the author of the Bible.
The reason for this is that God can't be the author of error. (Of
course, if God, like Satan, engages in purposeful deception, then all
bets are off, because deception by an omnipotent being, or even any
fantastically powerful being, is deception that would be truly
impossible for us mere humans to uncloak. But how many of you want to
argue that God is a deceiptful God?)

I'm sorry for the prejudicial nature of the remarks that I'm fairly
sure are going to come from certain quarters after the disclosure of
my comments here, and I sincerely hope that those who will get some
of the prejudicial flack will not hold it against me (too much
anyway). I can tell you, for the record, that no one knew of
my "going undercover" like this. In fact, if I remember correctly I
have received only one or two emails on this score, from Robert Baty
(written to me, not to Steve Heiden) several months ago, where he
asked if Steve Heiden had any connection to me, and I flatly denied
it at the time. I always intended to "break my cover" at some point,
with a post such as this one, though I was never really sure when I
was going to do this. I wanted to take the credit -- or the blame --
for the discussion that I've written as Steve Heiden. I have archived
the bulk of the discussion that I was involved in as Steve Heiden,
but up until now I've been prevented from using my own material
because it came from "Steve Heiden," not me. Well, now this is no
longer true.

To everyone on the BereanSpirit list, I wish you all the best, and
you really do have a good thing going here, thanks to Al Maxey.

If you happen to have any questions you would like to ask me, or any
comments you want to make, please post them here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/creationism

I will endeavor to properly address them. However, as I have
previously stated, I do intend to take a "vacation" from discussion
groups for at least the next 3 months, and I'm only going to be
online for a few more days to address anything.

I'm now unsubscribing from the BereanSpirit group. Farewell.

Regards,
Todd S. Greene
http://www.creationism.cc/