Re: [asa] ORIGINS/BIBLE: Evolution, Adam, and Romans

I am always trying

Michael
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: George Murphy
  To: Michael Roberts ; Alexanian, Moorad ; n j ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 9:31 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] ORIGINS/BIBLE: Evolution, Adam, and Romans

  Michael et al -

  I was just trying to be a good scientist by making it less than 100%. You can add a few more 9s if you wish.

  Shalom
  George
  http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Michael Roberts
    To: gmurphy@raex.com ; Alexanian, Moorad ; n j ; asa@calvin.edu
    Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 11:59 AM
    Subject: Re: [asa] ORIGINS/BIBLE: Evolution, Adam, and Romans

    Only 99.999% sure, I thought it was 100%. Any position which claims that there was no death before the Fall is simply false as are any derived ideas from that - including Calvin Beisner's nonsense on the environment (Where Garden meets Wilderness etc).

    I agree with the second part of your post especially its non-dogmatic tone.

    Sadly many prefer the strident arguments of the yelling YECs!

    Michael
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: George L. Murphygmurphy@raex.com
      To: Alexanian, Moorad ; George Murphy ; n j ; asa@calvin.edu
      Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:37 PM
      Subject: RE: [asa] ORIGINS/BIBLE: Evolution, Adam, and Romans

> > > George, how sure are you of what you wrote regarding morality and "death before the Fall" in PSCF? Give me a percentage. > > > Moorad > >

      I'm 99.9999% sure that there was death before the fall - i.e., that organisms that lived before Homo sapiens appeared were mortal. The evidence from the fossil record & the fact that there are no extant living trilobites, saber tooths &c is overwhelming.

      Whether or not the first humans in the theological sense were mortal - i.e., subject to physical death - is less certain but I think it's a sound theological opinion. I won't, however, try to assign a percentage to it. 1st, as Merv noted (& as I should have pointed out in my brief post), Gen.2:17 is incorrect within the context of the Genesis account if "die" is understood to refer to physical death. 2d, Barr makes a good case (in the book I referred to in my article) for understanding the story not as one of immortality which humanity once had & lost, but as a possibility for immortality via the tree of life which humanity lost because of sin.

      ________________________________ > > From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of George Murphy > Sent: Tue 1/2/2007 8:00 AM > To: n j; asa@calvin.edu > Subject: Re: [asa] ORIGINS/BIBLE: Evolution, Adam, and Romans > > > Paul, as a 1st century Jew, accepted the understanding common in his culture, that Adam & Eve should be understood as historical individuals. This is similar to the way in which the writer of Genesis 1 accepted the views of ancient near eastern cultures about the the structure of the world (flat earth with a dome over it & waters above the heavens). The Holy Spirit, in inspiring scripture, accomodated the essential message to the limitations of the biblical writers and their audiences. > > On the issue of inspiration you might look at my brief article "Couldn't God Get It Right?" at http://www.elca.org/faithandscience/covalence/story/default.asp?Copyright=06-03-15&Author=murphy&Pages=1 . For the broader topic of evolution and the fall you could look at my article "Roads to Paradise and Perdition: Christ, Evolution, and Original Sin" in Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 58, 109, 2006. Unfortunately it's not up on the asa website yet. > > Shalom > George > http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: n j > To: asa@calvin.edu > Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 12:45 AM > Subject: [asa] ORIGINS/BIBLE: Evolution, Adam, and Romans > > > Hi, > > I'm starting to lean heavily towards evolution, but it has some theological implications that I'm looking into. For example, many hold that Adam was not a literal person and that the account of the fall is symbolic of when humans began to have free choice, self-conciousness and became aware of morality. Understanding that they should act morally, however, they chose to behave otherwise. For those who hold this view, how do you account for Paul writing as if Adam was a historical person through whom sin entered the world -- Rom 5:12; 1 Cor 15:22; 15:45? > > Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. > >

      George L. Murphy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jan 2 16:58:47 2007