Re: [asa] Science as Christian vocation

Keith,

Thanks for this helpful analysis. But I would suggest that it is a new theological problem to be confronted with the evidences for common descent and to realize that God likely used the same processes to create man that He did for lower life forms. I would venture to say that throughout Christian history this has been commonly assumed to be discontinuous and one of the perqs associated with being created in the image of God.

Having to consider that He allows us to struggle for our survival against our environment being created imperfectly like for instance lacking the synthesis of vit C, takes away some of the sentimental notion of being fearfully and wondefully made and Him knowing the number of hairs on our head. I guess this disconnect was always there when we observed birth defects etc but those are easy to write off as anamolies. Being confronted with it across the board for the entire species is a new theological problem at least for me.

Thanks

John

--- On Wed, 2/4/09, Keith Miller <kbmill@ksu.edu> wrote:

> From: Keith Miller <kbmill@ksu.edu>
> Subject: Re: [asa] Science as Christian vocation
> To: "AmericanScientificAffiliation Affiliation" <asa@calvin.edu>
> Date: Wednesday, February 4, 2009, 10:15 AM
> John Walley wrote:
>
> > Interesting. I think one of the issues the church has
> with evolution and TE is because they don't want to
> accept the seemingly harsh and cruel concept of survival of
> the fittest. But if this was God's mechanism of creating
> life in the animal world, how do we then bridge the gap to
> the sanctity of life in humans?
> >
> > This opens a tremendus can of worms, not only eugenics
> but abortion, human relief etc. What is the stopgap to
> prevent the logical progression to the liberal theology of
> Schmucker?
>
> "Survival of the fittest" is a caricature of
> evolution. Evolution only presupposes what we all recognize
> as the reality of nature. That is, death is a given, and
> that those individuals that die before reproduction are on
> average less fit than those that survive. Moreover, that
> fitness is completely relative to the current environment in
> which that individual lives. Fitness is not an absolute
> quantity - it is not a statement that one individual is
> better in any absolute sense. In evolution, an unfit
> character can become fit with a change in the environment.
>
> On this question, evolution posses no significantly new
> theological problems than are already present with the
> recognition that death has been an integral part of creation
> from the beginning. This is just an extension of the
> Problem of Pain and the Problem of Natural Evil. This is
> nothing new with evolution.
>
> As has been discussed frequently on this list, God's
> creative action in and through the death and pain embedded
> in creation can be seen as consistent with and reflective of
> Christ. The Creator is the Crucified.
>
> Keith
>
> 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 Wed Feb 4 12:49:11 2009