Hello Jim,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Eisele [mailto:jeisele@starpower.net]
> Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 11:43 AM
> To: ateo@whitworth.edu
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: RE: Theological Consequences of Evolution
>
>
> Adrian Teo comments
>
> >One variation of OEC is to accept much of modern
> evolutionary theories but
> >nevertheless, maintain that with regard to humans, an act of special
> >creation was involved, thus breaking the continuity from
> nonhuman primates
> >to hominids.
>
> Let's listen to what the scientists have to say. Personally,
> I don't see what difference it makes. Either, God used evolution
> or He used some other process. Let God be God.
It is a very difficult problem for science to solve, and may not even be
solvable ultimately.
> >Of course, where the break actually occurred is uncertain, but
> >it seems necessary to hold this view in order to to account the
> >"specialness" of humans in creation as a moral agent endowed
> with divine
> >sonship.
>
> Careful, Adrian. It is not our job to tell God what the
> definition of special is.
There appears to be some confusion on your part. A distinction would be
helpful heere. Whatever we discover through science, theology, or any other
means is wholly description rahter than prescriptive. Our human attempts are
simply ways of figuring out what God did, and never to tell God what to do
(we couldn't even if we tried). So, no, I am not trying to say how God ought
to have done it, but simply to say that it appears that God had done it one
way or another.
Adrian.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 25 2002 - 12:12:22 EST