Re: [asa] Evolutionary Creation

Sorry Terry, I meant to post this.

The position you expressed that God does not evolve would appear to pose
a bit of a riddle. Is it so clear that our existence/experience of time
and temporal change is no reflection of, or is no relational counterpart
of anything of the existence and experience the One who brought us into
being? One really has then to ask, what value at all there might be to
God in a temporally constrained existence like ours.
Just askin'. - JimA [Friend of ASA]

Terry M. Gray wrote:

>Gregory,
>
>For most of us on this list Denis's evolutionary creation is
>synonymous with what is commonly denoted theistic evolution. I think
>that if push comes to shove, all of us here prefer the moniker
>"evolutionary creation" to "theistic evolution" because the noun is
>"creation" where we all want the stress to be. The fact of the matter
>is that Denis learned all about evolutionary creation from several of
>us on this list (past and present). Of course, he is now a scholar in
>this area in his own right.
>
>As for Keith Miller's "continuous creation" -- and we've discussed
>this before -- the evolutionary creationists/theistic evolutionists
>here agrees with what he means by it--that God is continuously
>involved in maintaining and governing the creation. However, in the
>history of ideas (in some circles) "continuous creation" means that
>everything is created from scratch every moment. Continuity of being
>is an illusion. Most orthodox Christian theologians have argued that
>this is defective view of creation. (Please note that I'm not saying
>that Keith holds to this view.)
>
>As for Gregory's question raised off and on recently, as to whether
>evolutionary creationists/theistic evolutionists believe that there
>are things that don't evolve. I can only speak for myself--of course,
>God doesn't evolve; I would say that the human soul (man as fully
>man--homo divinatis) did not evolve; being an unapologetic
>anthropological dualist, I'm also a "Creationist" with regard to
>anthropology, i.e. God creates each human soul separately. With
>respect to this matter, it's Biblical/theological claims that prove
>decisive to me. I have no in principle problems with an evolved soul.
>I'm also not sure that other things (various social structures,
>religious structures, etc.) evolve into being from "lower level"
>entities. What this means is that God brings those higher level
>things directly into being via creational law (think Dooyeweerd here.)
>
>Some (including Denis, I think) would hesitate to call me an
>evolutionist at all. Back to semantics, I guess (sorry Gregory). He
>also regards me as a concordist because I let the Bible speak so
>decisively on this issue.
>
>TG
>
>On Sep 1, 2007, at 1:38 PM, Gregory Arago wrote:
>
>
>
>>http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/3EvoCr.htm
>>
>>
>>Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk
>>email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail
>>
>>
>
>________________
>Terry M. Gray, Ph.D.
>Computer Support Scientist
>Chemistry Department
>Colorado State University
>Fort Collins, CO 80523
>(o) 970-491-7003 (f) 970-491-1801
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Sep 1 21:09:13 2007