From: Alexanian, Moorad (alexanian@uncw.edu)
Date: Mon Oct 06 2003 - 14:16:04 EDT
George, I am not sure I understand. If man had not fallen, we would
still be "walking in the garden in the cool of the day (with God)."
There would be no need for the Incarnation since God was already here
with us!
Moorad
-----Original Message-----
From: George Murphy [mailto:gmurphy@raex.com]
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 12:56 PM
To: Alexanian, Moorad
Cc: gmorbey@wlu.ca; ASA
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: RATE]
Alexanian, Moorad wrote:
>
> I suppose then there are those who believe in Kallistos Ware and those
> who believe in Scripture. It does not make sense to me to say that
the
> Incarnation is independent of the fact that man is a fallen creature.
> Why then Christ? If love is so important to God, where is love in
> creation except in man? I do not see it in anything purely physical,
> which is what the cosmos is!
It is a gratuitous insult to suggest that some Christians
"believe in Kallistos
Ware" as an _alternative_ to believing in Scripture! What Ware is
suggesting is an
interpretation of Scripture that goes back at least to Irenaeus and
finds considerable
support from, e.g., Ephesians 1:10: The Incarnation is not only a way
to save the world
from sin but was God's intention for creation from the beginning. There
have been
prominent theologians who have taken both sides of the question "Whether
Christ would
have come if humanity had not sinned" and we ought to avoid being
dogmatic about either
position. But my own feeling is that an excellent case can be made - on
the basis of
scripture - for the answer "Yes."
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 06 2003 - 14:16:13 EDT