Re: [asa] Historical trends in acceptance of evolution by orthodox Christians WAS Re: [asa] Denomenational Change

Hi Murray,

Well, I'd call this conversation a mutation rather than a morph - and an
(ahem) intelligently designed mutation at that. I was following up on one
of Ted's comments re: orthodox scientists ... to me, the historical trends
re: holding both orthodox theology & accepting evolution is very
interesting. So, Polkinghorne's comment that:

The Nicene Creed provides us with the outline of a rationally defensible
> theology which can be embraced with integrity as much today as when it was
> first formulated in the fourth century. (Science & Trinity, page 29)
>

would have been supported by very few scientists 60-80 years ago (or at
least, North American scientists - see: Michael's comment re: the different
situation across the pond). Today there is quite a bit of support for this
position. And it appears to me that this support is growing rapidly .. and
beyond just scientific specialties. Who knows, a generation from now, this
acceptance might not even be a minority position anymore.

thanks,

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Murray Hogg <muzhogg@netspace.net.au>wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I think the definition of "orthodox" has morphed.
>
> Didn't we start by discussing Eastern Orthodox views of evolution - now we
> seem to have swung to a rather more generic definition of "orthodox" - as in
> "theologically orthodox"?
>
> -Murray
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

-- 
Steve Martin (CSCA)
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.