From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Thu Sep 04 2003 - 13:26:13 EDT
Howard J. Van Till wrote:
>
> >From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
>
> > Are the passages to which I referred - & much else in the NT with a strongly
> > christocentric emphasis - the exclusive property of Lutherans?
>
> Of course not. But I am inclined to award you the prize for advancing that
> theological emphasis at every opportunity.
I won't turn down the prize but perhaps you should consider awarding it to
Torrance or Teilhard, both of whom are/were non-Lutherans & both of whom (though in
radically different ways) give a strong christological emphasis to their understanding
of creation.
Of course I realize that different people will do theology differently, & not
everyone will place the same emphasis on christology that I do. What I find strange is
that people on this list generally put no emphasis at all on Christ when they're talking
about science-theology matters. This is not just the case with your process emphasis
but with those who have much more traditional theological approaches & who, dealing with
other matters, would place Christ in the center. But when it comes to creation, he
disappears.
> With Ted, I do not ask you to abandon that commitment. My point is to note
> that it was your especially strong commitment to it that led you to
> disparage other theological approaches in the rather harsh language of
> "lame" "very little value" "defect" and the like.
I make no apology for (a) thinking that not all theological approaches are of
equal value & (b) that those which are not normed by scripture have little value (I
do not say "no value") for helping to understand Christian faith.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Sep 04 2003 - 13:35:22 EDT