> I'm proposing the introduction of a scriptural reference with each of us
> posting their thoughts on how that scripture fits with our claims
> regarding origins. The discussion could be entitled "Christ and
> Creation".
Whilst many may feel that such matters have been aired before on this
Reflector, I would like to see this proposal getting a positive vote.
There is little doubt in my mind that Theistic Evolution is
philosophically defensible, and debate over the philosophy serves
primarily to help us understand one another. To explain the
differences between Christians re origins, it is necessary to look at
our varying views of Scripture. Paul's suggestion must surely help.
Glen responded to Paul's proposal:
"I will take you up on one issue and that is the general
understanding that Genesis 1 rules out evolution. I believe that
Genesis 1 teaches evolution. Important verses are: ... "
My first observation on this is that Glen obviously believes that the
Bible has something about origins which has a bearing on our science.
Thus, Glen is not a "typical" Theistic Evolutionist - who, in my
experience, uses the "two-book" approach to the relationship between
science and Revelation and argues that these two books are entirely
complementary in the way we should read them.
I would hope that, if Paul's proposal is taken up, these aspects of
interpretation can be explored. In a way, this is what I am seeking
to do in my contributions to the Neanderthal Personal Ornament thread.
Glen continues:
"Genesis 1:11 (NIV) Then God said, "Let the land produce
vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit
with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so."
"Here God did not directly create the vegetation. He commanded the
LAND to produce it. This indirect creation of vegetation is exactly
what a theistic evolutionist believes happened. The bible supports
such an interpretation. ..."
There has been discussion of ex nihilo and mediate creation on the
Reflector before. I don't think that PCs or YECs would insist on
an interpretation of the creation of plants and animals which would
exclude mediate creation. Certainly we must all say that the creation
of man was mediate.
To go from mediate creation to theistic evolution is quite a jump!
Glen, are saltationist creationist theologies consistent with
Theistic Evolution? :-)
Paul's suggestion of "Christ and Creation" is one seeking to set
Genesis 1 in the context of the whole of God's revelation. We know
that Christ was the Agent of Creation - through him the world was
made. His miracles tell us something of his nature: those who
witnessed them came to identify him as more than a prophet. Most of
his miracles were mediate: changing the water into wine, feeding the
4000 and the 5000, etc.
My response to Glen is to suggest that he defends his position on
Genesis 1 as one of several possible interpretations of mediate
creation; and to consider how Genesis 1 is to be integrated with the
rest of Scripture (perhaps picking up on comments above about the
meaning of Christ's miracles. Should they not predispose us to
consider the Genesis 1 creative acts of God as miraculous?).
*** From David J. Tyler, CDT Department, Hollings Faculty,
Manchester Metropolitan University, UK.
Telephone: 0161-247-2636 ***