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

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of gordon brown
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:39 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] Saving Darwin: What theological changes are required?

I see a contrast where you don't. OT writers in praising God for His
wonderful creation use ancient cosmology to describe the universe. This
doesn't weaken the point that they are making. On the other hand, Paul's
discussion in Rom. 5:12-19 loses a lot of force if sin did not enter through
one individual person.

I respond:

That is a good point. However, if you take early Genesis (and science in
general, as the YEC and other concordists do) as though the trustworthiness
of the entire Bible rests on the accuracy of the various scientific points
which are *obviously* being made, then the conclusion is much the same. To
say that the OT writers (including Moses, in Genesis) were *simply* praising
God for His wonderful creation is false doctrine, according to some of the
to the YEC positions I have read. If you can concede that point of
accommodation in the former, why not concede the possibility of
accommodation with Paul? Moses is *clearly* stating that actual creation
took place in actual 24-hour days, and who are we to argue? (BTW, I'm not
comfortable with some of the consequences of evolutionary understandings on
theology either, just so you know. Just evaluating your original statement
on the logical merits of contrast between OT and Paul, trying to see the
logical difference in conclusions of accommodation vs. non-accommodation.)

Jon Tandy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jun 11 19:12:08 2008