From: bivalve (bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com)
Date: Mon Sep 30 2002 - 12:59:03 EDT
>How would we talk about angels in the context of modern
>science-theology dialogue?<
> Such a discussion should, of course, pay serious attention to
>what scripture does & does not enable us to say about angelic
>beings.<
Apart from their occasional accessibility to some human senses (and
to at least one donkey), little information is available. A pastor
(and former biologist, Jamie McGregor) reported that his small
daughter asked if angels have bones. The only answer he could come
up with was that they seem to have teeth, as they do occasionally
share a meal.
C. S. Lewis and Madeline L'Engle have some discusison of these types
of issues in their fiction. In particular, Lewis's spcae trilogy has
a few discussions of the more scientific aspects of angelic beings,
though largely reaching the conclusion that we do not know the
answers.
A Journal of Irreproducible Results paper purported to assess the
suitability of angels (from Carolina Theological Supply) as lab
animals. As they went through the walls of the maze and showed no
interest in the available rewards at the end of it, they were judged
to be less easy to work with than rats. Although silly in intent,
this does illustrate the difficulties of obtaining scientific data on
them.
Dr. David Campbell
Old Seashells
University of Alabama
Biodiversity & Systematics
Dept. Biological Sciences
Box 870345
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA
bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted
Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at
Droitgate Spa
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Sep 30 2002 - 13:44:43 EDT