Re: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade makes

I wish I was a member of ASA last year. :(
----- Original Message -----
From: "D. F. Siemens, Jr." <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
To: <gmurphy@raex.com>
Cc: <drsyme@cablespeed.com>; <glennmorton@entouch.net>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade makes

>
> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 14:37:30 -0500 "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
> writes:
>> >
>> > I will read some Polkinghorne as Wayne suggested, but would be
>> interested
>> > on others thoughts about this too.
>>
>> Though I don't endorse all the views expressed in it I think that
>> the
>> collection of essays edited by Warren S. Brown, Nancey Murphy and H.
>> Newton
>> Maloney, _Whatever Happened to the Soul: Scientific and Theological
>>
>> Portraits of Human Nature_ (Fortress, 1998) is helpful.
>>
>> Shalom
>> George
>>
> Brown, Murphy and Maloney is probably the best treatment of the notion
> that the soul or spirit is a function of brain, no more. It has been
> adopted by neurologists generally, as evidenced by the presentations at
> last year's ASA meeting at Trinity Western University. I am of the
> opinion that this conclusion springs from the inability of science to
> deal with anything immaterial, whether God, angel, soul, spirit, Satan or
> demon. A number of individuals have said that the trio, and especially
> Murphy, avoid any scripture that conflicts with their view. However, I
> have been told that a professor at Asbury has remedied this lack. I
> published a paper challenging this view in /Philosophia Christi/
> (Evangelical Philosophical Society), vol. 4, no. 2 (2002), and read a
> paper at Trinity which I think will be published (with improvements
> suggested by George) in the June /Perspectives/. I cannot see that being
> remembered by God, which Polkinghorne suggests, is equivalent to the
> immortality of the soul.
> Dave
Received on Sat Mar 19 17:45:34 2005