At 10:10 AM 2/11/00 -0500, George Murphy wrote:
> I think we set ourselves up for lots of inconclusive debate if we insist
that
>issues of theological anthropology be discussed in terms of "the image of
God."
So what else is new? :-) Sometimes the most inconclusive areas are the
most challenging.
[snip]
Intelligence, or the image of God however defined, are not
>necessary conditions for salvation.
Absolutely agreed.
> Having said this, we can then add that intelligence is at least a
significant
>component of "the image of God." Col.3:1 says the new self "is being
renewed _in
>knowledge_ according to the image of its creator." The one who is the
image of God by
>nature is the divine Logos, the Word or Reason of God, & Athanasius, e.g.,
saw this as
>constitutive of the image of God: Humanity was created _logikos_ -
rational - because
>of a special participation in the Logos.
At least here is a partial definition. This is a start.
> I realize the dangers of such a view of the image - various types of
anti-body
>dualism, gnosticism &c. It is important to emphasize that we are
intelligent precisely
>as bodily creatures. The imago isn't an abstract computer program.
To me, one of the fascinating things we will probably see in our lifetime
is something I read a few years ago. The prediction was made that by the
year 2525 we might have computers which are as complex as the human brain.
By then we will be able to see if AI is possible. WHatever the outcome, it
will have some deep philosophical implications.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 11 2000 - 21:24:28 EST