RE: [asa] Theological Perspectives Without a Literal Adam

From: Hofmann, Jim <jhofmann@Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU>
Date: Sun Aug 19 2007 - 10:38:13 EDT

 

I believe Denis Lamoureux would be an example:

 

http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/3EvoCr.htm

 

Jim Hofmann

 

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of David Opderbeck
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 2:57 PM
To: asa
Subject: [asa] Theological Perspectives Without a Literal Adam

 

I'm researching Christian theological perspectives in which a literal,
individual Adam is not central. Are there major streams of Christian
thought / confessional or denominational settings, and/or recognized
streams within broader traditions, in which affirming a literal Adam is
not an important concern? I'm aware of some of the specific articles in
publications such as PSCF, such as George Murphy's recent article, on
this question, but what I'm trying to suss out is the importance of a
literal Adam to the Christian tradition generally. Does the willingness
to suggest a non-literal Adam place one outside the flow of every major
branch of the tradition?

 

Ancillary to this, are there any scholars who could be classified as
"evangelical" who are willing to entertain a non-literal Adam? (I take
it from my own study and experience that mainstream evangelical
perspectives on scripture and hermeneutics, as well as evangelicalism's
generally Augustinian view of original sin, renders the possibility of a
non-literal Adam difficult).

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Aug 19 10:39:04 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 19 2007 - 10:39:04 EDT