Good discussion, fellas. Two cents here:
Denis wrote:
<<But in making this revelatory statement, it is
made within the context of a metaphysical epistemology. As a
result, your attempt to draw out answers from it by asking questions
from the context of an epistemology based in physical and historical
(VCR) is incongruent--it is the apples and oranges problem....
The metaphysical reality that the universe is a CREATION cannot be BOXED
within the confines of the epistemology of your question any more than
you can ask physical and historical (VCR) questions about the imago Dei
and BOX it.>>
I agree. This is precisely what I argued with Glenn about a while back! It is
a different literature than the NT, and thus is not to be approached with a
journalisitc (VCR) type of lens. Denis says it well with: "It has a number of
literary genres, and as a result it behooves us to select the proper "reading
package" for the proper passage."
Here's two more cents, from Dr. Donald McKim, theological "black belt" (if one
wants to use that analogy), writing about the majority view among evangelical
theologians:
"The Christian doctrine of creation proclaims God as the Creator ex nihilo.
This means God brought the world into existence 'out of nothing' through a
purposeful act of his free will. In this the Christian doctrine confesses God
as the almighty and sovereign Lord of all existence. Dualistic systems, by
positing another power besides God, limit this sovereignty and are thus to be
rejected." [Doctrine of Creation in "Dictionary of Evangelical Theology," pg.
282]
Thought I'd throw that in for you, Denis, sneak that I am. Your theological
colleagues down here are pretty tight on this one!
Jim