Re: Question for Clergy

From: Robert Schneider <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat Apr 22 2006 - 07:32:40 EDT

Note that I said that thought it reasonably hypothetical that the pattern
that is me might be _grounded_ in DNA, not _identical_ to DNA (analogous to
speaking of God as the "Ground of Being" (Tillich)). Obviously DNA expresses
what atoms and what arrangements appear in our physical selves; I agree that
it doesn't determine our environment (e.g., what language(s) we speak, or
whether our religious propensities are Baptist or Anglican.

In the end, we can all agree that the resurrected body is "a mystery."

Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: "D. F. Siemens, Jr." <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
To: <jarmstro@qwest.net>
Cc: <drsyme@cablespeed.com>; <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>;
<tandyland@earthlink.net>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 12:17 AM
Subject: Re: Question for Clergy

>I have to agree with Jack that DNA won't do. Presumably, it is one of the
> things that makes me an individual. But it seems certain that there are
> some changes in the DNA in the zygote from which I began and that in at
> least some of the cells making up my current body. It is necessarily so
> in some people I have encountered. I think of a woman with one blue and
> one brown eye. Statistically, it should be so in me. So which would form
> my resurrected body?
>
> There is nothing that I know has been demonstrated in DNA that has me
> speaking Spanish and English. That's a function of where I grew up. There
> are no end of other traits that similarly spring from my environment at
> various times. What makes the me the individual that I am is the whole
> combination of nature (mostly DNA) and nurture.
>
> But there is something else that I believe has to be considered. If
> nonreductive physicalism does not allow the Incarnation (see my paper in
> PSCF, 57:3 (2005) 187), it also doesn't fit my being. I admit that I have
> not seen Green's book (n. 7) that was claimed to consider all the
> relevant scripture passages, so there may be a defense out there. But I
> expect it to be holey rather than holy.
> Dave
>
>
Received on Sat Apr 22 07:34:13 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Apr 22 2006 - 07:34:13 EDT