Re: [asa] Nature editorial

From: George Murphy <>
Date: Wed Jun 13 2007 - 17:13:25 EDT

I haven't seen this but will be very interested to know how that argument supposedly goes. Of course it helps to know the range of meanings that the imago dei has had in the theological discussions over the centuries. I suspect that the editors of Nature may not.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Charles Carrigan
  Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 4:35 PM
  Subject: [asa] Nature editorial

  Dear Friends,

  I just got the table of contents email for the June 14 issue of Nature. Scanning through it I see there is an editorial entitled "Evolution and the brain". Sounds interesting. But then below that it says "With all deference to the sensibilities of religious people, the idea that man was created in the image of God can surely be put aside."

  I haven't yet read the editorial (no easy access), but the statement regarding the image of God seems too absurd for words. Sounds like another poor attempt by scientists to do bad theology outside their area of expertise.

  Has anyone read it & willing to comment?


  Charles W. Carrigan, Ph.D.
  Assistant Professor of Geology
  Olivet Nazarene Univ., Dept. of Physical Sciences
  One University Ave.
  Bourbonnais, IL 60914
  PH: (815) 939-5346
  FX: (815) 939-5071

  "To a naturalist nothing is indifferent;
  the humble moss that creeps upon the stone
  is equally interesting as the lofty pine which so beautifully adorns the valley or the mountain:
  but to a naturalist who is reading in the face of the rocks the annals of a former world,
  the mossy covering which obstructs his view,
  and renders indistinguishable the different species of stone,
  is no less than a serious subject of regret."
            - James Hutton

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jun 13 17:14:16 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 13 2007 - 17:14:16 EDT