Re: Re: [asa] Re: Reading Genesis theologically NOT historically

From: <>
Date: Sat Oct 03 2009 - 18:11:02 EDT


Evolution as a "theologically challenging 'worst case' scenario" is an
interesting way of thinging about it.

I'm still less than 100% certain that biological evolution explains
everything that evolutionists would like to think it does, but maybe I
don't have to worry about it too much if I just think of it as a "worst
case" scenario. Thanks for the insight.

Paul Bruggink

On Oct 3, 2009 4:39pm, Murray Hogg <> wrote:
> Hi Moorad,

> Time might fail me to recite all the data and prior information - but I
> can give you a few broad working principles which, at the current time,
> constitute the "minimal constraints" for my thinking;

> 1) That evolution happened - here let me say that I adopt this not
> because I have a blind devotion to scientific consensus but because it
> provides a theologically challenging 'worst case' scenario.

> 2) That all theology ought to be biblical (on which refer next)

> 3) That all biblical exegesis ought to be conducted christocentrically
> and informed by the leading of the Spirit and the wisdom of the Church
> (ie reading scripture is a holistic exercise involving heart, mind, and
> will. It is NOT a matter of solving intellectual puzzles or
> obtaining "right" answers to every question which might possibly be
> raised).

> 4) That the resolution to "sin" is found in relationship to God,
> therefore to properly comprehend the nature of sin we must think
> primarily in relational rather than forensic terms.

> I'm not sure there are any other "non-negotiables" at present - there
> probably doesn't have to be given the above cover a pretty large swath of
> territory!

> Blessings,

> Murray

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Oct 3 18:11:50 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Oct 03 2009 - 18:11:50 EDT