Re: Kennedy

> Terry wrote: "That's just good old Reformed theology. I'm in full
> agreement with
> Kennedy here. No sacred/secular distinction. "
>
> Full agreement? Kennedy wants to replace science with YEC nonsense. I
> know you differ with him on that point.
>
> Do you also consider yourself a "vice regent" of God, and proclaim to
> others that you are such? To me, that seems like hubris. But I could
be
> wrong.

That humanity is to be God's representative in ruling creation
certainly seems to be implied by Gen.1:26-28 & Ps.8. But to say that
we are _called_ to be vice-regents & to imagine that we really do
represent God as we're supposed to are 2 very different things. The God
we're supposed to represent is the one revealed in Christ, who came not
to be served but to serve & died for the sake of creation. & he is the
one in whom these texts are really fulfilled - cf. Heb.2:6-9.

Where hubris - or more precisely, sin - displays itself in the notion
that the world is simply given to us for our benefit, & that we can use
it as we please. It is possible to be an environmentally responsible
YEC but one of the hazards of YEC (besides the basic bad science &
naive theology) is that it separates humanity from the rest of creation
& thus tends to encourage the idea that God really cares only about us
& that all the rest of creation is just disposable scaffolding.
 
> I like Ben Franklin's approach to all this a lot better. See
Isaacson's
> recent bio.

Franklin was a good experimental physicist (to use anachronistic
terminology) but no theologian.

Shalom,
George
Received on Thu Mar 17 15:32:26 2005