Re: [asa] BioLogos - Bad Theology?

From: Douglas Hayworth <becomingcreation@gmail.com>
Date: Mon May 18 2009 - 13:24:50 EDT

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Schwarzwald <schwarzwald@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe what Biologos is suggesting here... <snip>
> Again, keep in mind what Biologis and Conway Morris are saying here... <snip>
> So I would (again, provisionally - Biologos is new, and I'm still not clear
> on their direction) say that Conway Morris and Biologos are taking the same
> tact. <snip>

For it's part, I don't think BioLogos is specifically arguing for
anything here. They are simply just relating Conway Morris' hypothesis
for consideration in the larger discussion in which it wants to be a
part.

As for Mike's concerns, I'm with Ted: I just don't see how Mike
interprets this hypothesis as bad theology. Isn't the implication of
Conway Morris' argument that it is scientifically defensible to
content that God had us in mind from the beginning, indeed that he
structured and governed the formation of life to ensure that we
arrived?

Perhaps you can get out of your theological quandry this way:
Depending on your view of God's foreknowledge, he either knew each of
us specific individuals (soul and body) from the beginning (as I think
Mike is arguing), or he foreknew (and ensured) that sentient beings
would emerge with whom he would communicate (and become one of to
redeem). Either option is consistent with Conway Morris' scientific
hypothesis; it's just a matter of how weak or strongly each is
supported by the idea. With respect to the first concept of
foreknowledge, the scientific hypothesis (as the general revelation
that science is) only takes us part way to "proving" that God planned
for us to be here. With respect to the second option, the scientific
hypothesis goes a bit further. In both cases, though, it is supportive
of -- rather than contrary to -- the Christian concept of a
purposeful, creator God.

Doug Hayworth

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon May 18 13:25:36 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 18 2009 - 13:25:36 EDT