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

I see the value as creating a greater coherence to our understanding
of creation. I think it also raises valuable questions about the
treatment of animals. Not to resort to ad hominem comments, but it
wasn't that long ago that Africans were considered to be less than
fully human, and mistreated as a consequence.

I am not saying we MUST do this. I am asking that the dialog be
opened and that we challenge the assumption of yesteryear that we were
not to be understood as animals.

On a related note, I think there are many cases where the biblical
writers, reflecting current views, made incorrect statements about the
natural world. The shape and motion of the earth, inheritance of
characteristics, the renewal of the eagle's youth, etc are all
examples. It doesn't bother me at all that Paul would have thought
Adam was a real person and incorporated that misunderstanding into his
Christology.

Evangelicals are only selectively inerrantist, in my opinion. When
the case becomes strong enough they can always "re-interpret", as they
did long after Galileo.

2008/6/10 Bill Hamilton <williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com>:
> 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.
>

-- 
Karl Giberson, Ph.D,
www.karlgiberson.com
Professor of Physics, Eastern Nazarene College, Quincy, MA
Director of the Forum on Faith & Science, Gordon College, Wenham, MA.
Phone: 781-801-2189
Fax: 617-847-5933
 "A person without a sense of humor is like a wagon without springs --
jolted by every pebble in the road." Henry Ward Beecher
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.