Re: [asa] Question for all the theistic evolutionists

Hello ASA List!
   
  A few quotes from this thread followed by commentary:
   
  “IOG must do something useful other than be a name. And while I agree, that no one can PROVE what it is, one can offer interesting possibilities…” – Glenn M.
   
  “I don't claim to know who THE Adam & Eve were, except that the Bible says there were such people…I don't think Adam has to be neolithic; and indeed, I think the principle of accommodation can help explain the anachronisms in where the Bible seems to locate Adam in time.” – David O.
   
  “There are of course different views on this, but I think the most consistent ‘accommodation’ view, gets rid of a historical Adam altogether.” – Jack
   
  “If we discount the Genesis narrative as to place and time, (Mesopotamia, 7,000 years ago) why attach any credibility to the man named - Adam? Let's just say we don't believe any of it and that 'Adam' didn't exist at all.” - Dick Fischer (tongue in cheek!)
   
  There is neither time or space now for me to comment, so this is the extent of my hot-air typed here in letters. I don’t know how it sounds to the rest of the Christians on this list, but the idea of ‘getting rid of a historical Adam (and Eve) altogether’ sounds rather distasteful to these ears! All three Abrahamic religions and even Baha'i recognize the person ‘Adam’ as original and REAL. Why would accommodation-alists (in their ideological [sometimes TE] stance) wish to conceive/perceive/believe Adam as unreal? What purpose does it serve but to lower theology to the power of (natural) science?
   
  It is well known that ASA once issued an unambiguous statement: ‘We believe in creation!’ Would ASA be willing to follow that important, courageous clarification up with a further statement: ‘We believe in Adam and Eve!’? This is one of my main 'questions for all the theistic evolutionists,' in keeping with the topic of this thread.
   
  If not, then I think the critics of biblical relativity have indeed a point worth making. The ideas of an Adamic anthropologist (/geo-physicist) or a Christological Physicist sound equally impressive and astonishing to me!
   
  Arago
   
  p.s. visited a new church by invitation today and the Pastor in his sermon about 'worldviews' credited ‘secularism’ to Charles Darwin!
   
  
George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
  I was quoting Wells. I am not committed to his views although they need to be taken seriously. They would pose no problem for my theology. If you want to talk about that theology do it in terms of my June 2006 PSCF paper for this particular topic.

But since you already imagine that you know what I think, why bother?

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Fischer"
To: "ASA"
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 9:27 AM
Subject: RE: [asa] Question for all the theistic evolutionists

> Hi George, you wrote (quoting Wells):
>
> "First, it shows us our most recent common ancestor (Adam). This man lived in Africa around 60,000 years ago."
>
> Then we should look in Africa for the Garden of Eden? Where in Africa is the Euphrates River? Where in Africa is "Assyria"? Where in Africa did they make stringed musical instruments? Where in Africa did they make implements of bronze and iron?
>
> If we discount the Genesis narrative as to place and time, (Mesopotamia, 7,000 years ago) why attach any credibility to the man named - Adam? Let's just say we don't believe any of it and that "Adam" didn't exist at all. Why not start out saying its all myth and the ignorant Hebrews made it all up, since that is obviously what you think?
>
> Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association
> Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
> www.genesisproclaimed.org
                 
---------------------------------
Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Mar 18 19:09:09 2007