Re: [asa] Re: Peter Enns and the future direction of WTS

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Sun Mar 30 2008 - 18:14:50 EDT

Gregory

Your post simply indicates that you do not understand any of the issues either about Christianity in general or science and religion in particular.

Many Christens do not accept a historical Adam, including a good number of evangelicals.

The two books idea is familiar to anyone who knows their history of Christian thought as it was very common and general in the 16 and 17th century , and largely went out for most non-evangelicals in the 19th century. A basic grasp of the history of ideas is very useful for those on this list as it stops us from being too narrowly focussed on say just Christianity and geology:):)

Denis's combination of dentistry biology and theology is most useful and it seems to give him a certain bite. It is just as useful and no more or less than those like George who have physics and theology, or even Thistleton with his philosophy and theology or David Lyon and his sociology. All bring a bottle to share and it is good to learn from others with a different perspective. I value learning from anyone from whatever background - unless they have a closed mind

I cannot see what the point of the WTS's institutional sovereignty as a human social issue. You comment is so obvious that it doesn't need stating.

I wish I could understand how your mind works and why you always bring up such ideas

Michael
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Gregory Arago
  To: Denis O. Lamoureux ; Steve Martin ; ASA
  Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 1:16 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Re: Peter Enns and the future direction of WTS

  To add to the question of 'why not historical Adam and Eve?' (which is more or less consistent for Jews, Christians and Muslims, even Bahai's), I'd like to pose something else. Why ONLY Two (2) books? Why not three, or five or 7 books? Is it due to the Tradition? Does it say 'two books' anywhere in Scripture or is this a modernist 'natural science and theology' reading? Does the connection of biology, dentistry and theology afford a special perspective on this topic that others are likely not privy to? Surely the issue of 'institutional sovereignty' (e.g. WTS) is a human-social problem/issue, not something usually studied by natural scientists or theologians (in their main works).

  Thanks in advance for comments. - G.A.

  "Denis O. Lamoureux" <dlamoure@ualberta.ca> wrote:
    24 years ago I felt called to open God's Two Books. Any yes, like many, I started the voyage as a young earth creationist. But along the way there were a few surprises--Gen 1-11 is not a historical record, and biological evolution is a FACT. But through the process the Lord Jesus was right there, front and centre. Sadly, I had to leave my tradition to find a job.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Mar 30 18:17:17 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Mar 30 2008 - 18:17:17 EDT