From: Walter Hicks (wallyshoes@mindspring.com)
Date: Sat Aug 16 2003 - 13:23:28 EDT
George,
Very helpful! Thank you.
walt
George Murphy wrote:
> Walter Hicks wrote:
> >
> > George Murphy wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Or
> > > (c) Start from the claim that God has revealed himself in the life, death, and
> > > resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth and from that standpoint interpret both scripture and
> > > scientific understanding of the world.
> >
> > SNIP.
> >
> > George,
> >
> > You have made remarks like this on several occasions. I am beginning to think that you
> > really mean it ;-)
> >
> > Based upon your experience from this viewpoint, how do you envision evolution and what do
> > make of apparently conflicting biblical statements. If fact, how does viewpoint affect your
> > belief in the "infallibility" of the Bible itself? (If you do not mind commenting.)
>
> Walt -
> Some of my _Perspectives_ articles available at the ASA website deal with
> evolution and God's action in the world from this standpoint - in particular, "A
> Theological Argument for Evolution", "Chiasmic Cosmology: A Response to Fred Van Dyke",
> "The Paradox of Mediated Creation /Ex Nihilo/" and "Chiasmic Cosmology and Creation's
> Functional Integrity". The main ideas I've pursued in treating evolution are:
> 1) God's kenosis and hiddenness in the event of the cross should lead us to
> expect that God's action in the world in general is hidden, and thus that at one level
> the scientific description of the world is satisfactory.
> 2) The development of life through natural selection is in a sense "the same
> kind of thing" as the resurrection of the crucified, creatio ex nihilo, and
> justification of the ungodly (cf. Rom.4).
> 3) Through the Incarnation God participates in the evolutionary process,
> identifies with the losers in that process by getting killed, & by assuming not only
> human nature but our whole evolutionary history makes it possible to make sense of the
> promises of cosmic salvation in the NT.
>
> The most important way in which scripture is to be read is as witness to, &
> interpretation of, the history of Israel & the church centered on Christ. In this sense
> we should follow Luther's statement (though not in a-historical or other naive ways)
> that "all scripture everywhere deals only with Christ." This does not give a formula
> for exegesis of individual passages, & we need to give full attention to historical
> scientific, cultural, literary &c data in dealing with them. The divine kenosis in the
> Incarnation provides a way of understanding why scripture, while inspired by the Holy
> Spirit, is accomodated to the scientific, historical &c views of its human writers -
> like the archaic cosmology of Gen.1.
> The important sense in which scripture is true & authoritative is
> christological. Many of the "errors & contradictions" which some critics delight in &
> defenders of "inerrancy" labor to "harmonize" come from an insistence that scripture can
> only be read as historical narrative, & go away when we realize that this isn't so.
> OTOH, realization that scripture's primary function is to support the proclamation of
> Christ allows us to see that questions about how long Pekah was king of Israel, what
> prophet Matthew was referring to in 27:9-10 &c are of 2dary importance.
> We're also free to recognize what is, frankly, the obvious reading of Genesis 1
> & 2 - i.e., that there are 2 creation stories here which don't agree in chronology &c, &
> therefore that both (& perhaps neither) shouldn't be read as historical accounts. They
> are true & authoritative theological statements about God's relationship with the world
> & humanity, & about human nature & responsibility, but not of the kind that we can draw
> accurate scientific data from. & the fact that it's Christ, rather than Adam & Eve, who
> defines genuine humanity, means that these stories are to be read in the light of the
> NT, not the other way around.
>
> I hope this is helpful.
>
> Shalom,
> George
>
>
>
> George L. Murphy
> gmurphy@raex.com
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
-- =================================== Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 16 2003 - 13:36:37 EDT