Re: [asa] "Evolutionary Creation" book comments

Hi all,

Okay, you'll have to forgive my ignorance here with the particular scholar being referenced, but from my own reading of Genesis 2, it seems to me that this is also a passage describing functionality - specifically, the functional relationships between man and creation, and man and woman. I see Adam as both literal and metaphorical here (in other words, a historical person who has been transformed here into a theological symbol). So, I don't follow why the functionality argument can't be maintained for Genesis 2 or how that would necessarily invalidate a literal Adam?

In Christ,
Christine

"For we walk by faith, not by sight" ~II Corinthians 5:7

Help save the life of a homeless animal--visit www.azrescue.org to find out how.

Recycling a single aluminum can conserves enough energy to power your TV for 3 hours--Reduce, Reuse, Recycle! Learn more at www.cleanup.org

--- On Tue, 9/29/09, Pete Enns <peteenns@mac.com> wrote:

> From: Pete Enns <peteenns@mac.com>
> Subject: Re: [asa] "Evolutionary Creation" book comments
> To: "Denis O. Lamoureux" <dlamoure@ualberta.ca>
> Cc: "Jim Armstrong" <jarmstro99@q.com>, "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
> Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2009, 12:42 PM
> Denis,
>
> This is my main criticism of John Walton, too. I think he
> is doing marvelous work helping people who are struggling
> with the implications of Gen 1. I will likely see him at SBL
> in November, and I hope to ask him whether he intends to
> continue he work into Gen 2-3.
>
> I also am not entirely convinced of his material/function
> distinction, but it is certainly valuable to consider.
>
> Pete Enns
>
> On Sep 29, 2009, at 12:42 PM, Denis O. Lamoureux wrote:
>
> > Dear Jim,
> > It's easy for Walton to use his "it ain't about
> material origins,
> > but functional origins" in Gen 1.
> >
> > But did you notice something?  HE STOPS AT GEN
> 1.
> > Why doesn't he use his thesis on Gen 2 and Adam?
> >
> > Ask him if he thinks Gen 2 is historical?  He
> works at
> > Wheaton College, and if he says there is no
> HISTORICAL
> > Adam, then he's gone . . . .
> >
> > D
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Armstrong"
> <jarmstro99@q.com>
> > To: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
> > Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 8:19 PM
> > Subject: Re: [asa] "Evolutionary Creation" book
> comments
> >
> >
> >> I think you are dead on. John Walton, OT scholar
> from Wheaton presented a lecture for Canyon Institute for
> Advanced Studies in Phoenix in 2006 titled, "Reading Genesis
> with 1 with Ancient Eyes: What Does it Mean to
> Create?"   In it, he discussed at some length
> this matter of ancient perspective, and I believe he would
> agree entirely with your surmise that the division implicit
> in those the two words would be incomprehensible to those
> ancient eyes. Science had neither defined nor differentiated
> itself in those days. Nor did they did not think in material
> terms per se, instead understanding everything as a part of
> God's presence and activity in the world. Walton mentions
> that "miracle" is a New Testament word, things that denote
> some departure from what nature has the capacity to do in
> the material world. In contrast, the OT terms are signs and
> wonders, and distinctly (he says) not about shuffling
> material things about, again because those ancient eyes and
> hearts (a western term) do not have a framework at all like
> western material-based terminology and explanation. He
> suggested our traditional way of interpreting much of Gen.
> 1, for example, would fall on the ancient ears about as well
> as an explanation of daylight saving time.
> >> JimA [Friend of ASA]
> >> Murray Hogg wrote:
> >>> Hi Denis,
> >>>
> >>> I actually wonder if using the terms "science"
> and "history" in this context isn't - in the end analysis -
> anachronistic.
> >>>
> >>> I'd offer the observation that what
> "pre-modern" societies do is tell stories - they don't do
> "science", and they don't record "history". And if one can
> escape the need to force Genesis into either category, then
> the result is very liberating. One can even begin to read
> Genesis theologically as per the entire point of the
> narrative!
> >>>
> >>> Here I think much benefit might be gained from
> a familiarity with the field of ethnohistory - which
> discipline gives some interesting insights into the way
> non-Western and pre-modern societies deal with their past.
> It's on my list of subjects to get around to "one day."
> >>>
> >>> Actually, as I think about it, this might be
> more or less another way of putting your entreaty of
> "Separate, don't conflate", viz; if one can discriminate
> between "history", "science", and "story" -- where "story"
> is a way of conveying meaning (theological meaning in the
> case of Genesis) -- then one is, I think, well on the way to
> resolving the "problem" which arises in light of our
> modernist inability to see that there is more than one way
> of conveying spiritual truth.
> >>>
> >>> Blessings,
> >>> Murray
> >>>
> >>> Denis O. Lamoureux wrote:
> >>>> Dear Bernie,
> >>>> You are a scrapper my friend!
> >>>>
> >>>> You write:
> >>>>> Ancient theological idea:
> >>>>> Adam was the first human to sin.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This statement is nothing but
> theology
> >>>>
> >>>> NOT true.  It's ancient science
> (creation
> >>>> and existence of Adam) delivering an
> inerrant
> >>>> and Holy Spirit-inspired theology (sin is
> >>>> very real and humans are sinners).
> >>>>
> >>>> Bernie: Separate, Don't Conflate!
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> Denis
> >>>
> >>> 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.
> >>
> >
> >
> > 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.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Sep 29 13:53:39 2009