Re: Human origins and doctrine (was Definition of "Species")

From: Howard J. Van Till (
Date: Wed Feb 27 2002 - 08:18:01 EST

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: Virgin Birth"


    Thanks for the responses. Perhaps one way to describe the differences in
    what we emphasize is that I seem more concerned about dangers from the side
    of dogmatic conservatism, while you are more concerned about dangers from
    the side of unrestrained relativism. Both are, I believe, legitimate

    > As I said earlier, the parallel between science and theology isn't exact.

    True, but I probably judge the parallels to be closer than you do.

    My original statement was:
    > Once we recognize these "fundamental doctrines of the faith" as "human best
    > efforts" offered by historical communities of faith at varying times and in
    > varying cultural, political and sociological circumstances, they can then be
    > appreciated, valued, examined, adopted, modified, rejected, or replaced, but
    > idolized as the final word or used as a club to beat other good persons away
    > the community of those who declare themselves followers of Christ

    You replied:

    > There is some loaded language here. I am not interested in "beating away"
    > "good people" but in trying to maintain the faithfulness of the church's
    > proclamation and teaching.

    I know that well. That "loaded language" there was my reaction to some of
    the other recent message traffic in which strident charges of "un-Christian"
    were filling the air.

    Howard Van Till

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 27 2002 - 08:32:04 EST