Re [asa] Question for all the theistic evolutionists

At 10:54 AM 3/14/2007, burgytwo@juno.com wrote:

>Jack wrote: "I have been reluctant to accept Glenn's idea for two
>reasons, the first being that the indicators of the bible are clear
>I think, that Adam was Neolithic, and secondly because he has not
>convinced me that ancient evidence for burial, etc is the same as
>being made in God's image."

@ If this throws any light on the subject - I'm reposting what I
posted almost a year ago on Thu, 06 Apr 2006 14:20:03 -0400
Subject: Re: "Image FOR God" = Proper translation of Gen 1:26
http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200604/0170.html

Created in the Tselem of God: A
reply http://www.tektonics.org/mordef/bodyblow.html

Mormon: [Note 45] "Scott N. Morschauser, a Presbyterian Theologian,
has recently used the evidence from the Ancient Near East to argue
that Gen 1:26 should be more properly understood as, "Image for God."
In this way, many theological stumbling blocks can be diverted since
man isn't really in the image of God." ~ S.N. Morschauser, "Created
in the Image of God: The Ancient Near Eastern Background of the Imago
Dei," Theology Matters, Vol 3 No.6 Nov/Dec 1997.
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:rykV-Jmomk8J:www.theologymatters.com/TMIssues/Novdec97.pdf+Morschauser+Created+in+the+Image+of+God+&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

J.P. Holding: The idea makes sense, since "for" is implied indeed in
the meaning. [snip]

~ Janice

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Mar 14 11:43:50 2007