Thanks very much for your gracious (literally) response.
To accept Barnes on the Fall is to reject even a semblance of an objective
atonement. Ultimately Barnes minimises Sin unlike Barth etc., even though
they have no historical Adam yet retain a strong atonement.
> Yes, I would agree. Though I would say that there are two distinct
> within this conflict position: a science replaces religion (e,g. Draper,
> White etc.); and a religion replaces science (the extreme creationists).
> develop this in my 'A typology for sciene and religion' <I>Evangelical
> Quarterly</I> <b>LXXII</b> (1) (2000): 35-56.
Can you send me a copy of this please and watch out for my paper in the EQ
on Genesis and Geology in April.
Regards from the frozen north of England
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 13 2002 - 17:31:31 EST