Re: [asa] Saving Darwin: What theological changes are required?

Honestly, I don't see what extending the image of God to other species accomplishes, except alienating orthodox Christians. What positive result could come from it, Karl?

 
William E. (Bill) Hamilton, Ph.D. Member ASA
248.821.8156 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31
http://www.bricolagia.blogspot.com/
Want to help a child?: http://www.compassion.com/sponsor/index.asp?referer=85198

----- Original Message ----
> From: Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com>
> To: ASA list <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 8:16:00 AM
> Subject: Re: [asa] Saving Darwin: What theological changes are required?
>
> Hi karl,
>
>
>
> "Let me comment about the imago dei. It seems to me that, until such
>
> time as we can all agree on exactly what the Imago dei refers to, we
>
> must refrain from saying that it is present only in the human species."
>
>
>
> I don't agree that "we must" do this. The Imago dei is a theological
> concept derived only from the Bible and sets man apart from the rest of
> creation. I view it as the aspect of our essence that allows us to *relate*
> to God.
>
>
>
> If you would like to extend this concept to other species, what you need to
> do is to a) define Imago dei and b) identify the other species that fall
> under the definition. Unless you can do this, I see no reason to extend it
> to other species.
>
>
>
> It is one thing to envision ways by which to reconcile theology with the
> science du jour, but it's another thing to build a theology on science. Are
> we going to define Imago dei, a theological concept, in scientific,
> reductionist terms? How is this all that different from the atheist who
> derives philosophical naturalism from methodological naturalism?
>
>
>
> "But we cannot be as glib as Christians of yesteryear in thinking that there
> is some simple
>
> distinction between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom. Fran De
> Waals recounts many provocative stories of primate behaviors that, were they
> performed by humans, would be considered exemplary of kindness and
> generosity."
>
>
>
> And on the other hand, you should tread very, very carefully as many today
> use these very arguments to justify a campaign of harassment and terrorism
> against scientists. The construction workers building a new animal research
> facility at Oxford University must hide their identities and be protected by
> the police.
>
>
>
> -MikeGene
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "karl.w.giberson@enc.edu"
> To: "Ted Davis"
> Cc: "ASA list" ; "Stephen Matheson" ;
> "Steve Martin"
> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 9:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [asa] Saving Darwin: What theological changes are required?
>
>
> > Let me comment about the imago dei. It seems to me that, until such
> > time as we can all agree on exactly what the Imago dei refers to, we
> > must refrain from saying that it is present only in the human species.
> > If, for example, we think that empathy or altruism are a part of the
> > imago dei, then we must think about what this means for other species
> > that exhibit these traits. My comment, which was not verbally
> > inspired by God, was simply that we must consider this issue. Perhaps,
> > upon consideration, we will do nothing. But we cannot be as glib as
> > Christians of yesteryear in thinking that there is some simple
> > distinction between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom. Fran De
> > Waals recounts many provocative stories of primate behaviors that,
> > were they performed by humans, would be considered exemplary of
> > kindness and generosity.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jun 10 10:49:14 2008