By Jack Collins, on August 20th, 2010
by C. John Collins
The best way to account for both the biblical presentation of human life and our own experience in the world is to suppose that Adam and Eve were real persons, and the forebears of all other human beings. The biblical presentation concerns not simply the story in Genesis and the biblical passages that refer to it, but also the larger biblical storyline, which deals with God’s good creation invaded by sin, for which God has a redemptive plan; Israel’s calling to be a light to the nations; and the church’s prospect of successfully bringing God’s light to the whole world. The biblical presentation further concerns the unique role and dignity of the human race, which is a matter of daily experience for everyone: all people yearn for God and need him, depend on him to deal with their sinfulness, and crave a wholesome community for their lives to flourish.
PSCF 62, no. 3 (2010): 147-165
By Dennis Venema, on August 20th, 2010
by Dennis R. Venema
The relatively new and rapidly expanding field of comparative genomics provides a wealth of data useful for testing the hypothesis that humans and other forms of life share common ancestry. Numerous independent lines of genomics evidence strongly support the hypothesis that our species shares a common ancestor with other primates. Additional lines of evidence also indicate that our species has maintained a population size of at least several thousand individuals since our speciation from the ancestors of other great apes. This article will provide an overview of genomics evidence for common ancestry and hominid population sizes, and briefly discuss the implications of these lines of evidence for scientific concordist approaches to the Genesis narratives.
PSCF 62, 3 (2010): 166-178
By Dan Harlow, on August 20th, 2010
by Daniel C. Harlow
Recent research in molecular biology, primatology, sociobiology, and phylogenetics indicates that the species Homo sapiens cannot be traced back to a single pair of individuals, and that the earliest human beings did not come on the scene in anything like paradisal physical or moral conditions. It is therefore difficult to read Genesis 1–3 as a factual account of human origins. In current Christian thinking about Adam and Eve, several scenarios are on offer. The most compelling one regards Adam and Eve as strictly literary figures—characters in a divinely inspired story about the imagined past that intends to teach theological, not historical, truths about God, creation, and humanity.
Taking a nonconcordist approach, this article examines Adam and Eve as symbolic- literary figures from the perspective of mainstream biblical scholarship, with attention both to the text of Genesis and ancient Near Eastern parallels. Along the way, it explains why most interpreters do not find the doctrines of the Fall and original sin in the text of Genesis 2–3, but only in later Christian readings of it. This article also examines briefly Paul’s appeal to Adam as a type of Christ. Although a historical Adam and Eve have been very important in the Christian tradition, they are not central to biblical theology as such. The doctrines of the Fall and original sin may be reaffirmed without a historical Adam and Eve, but invite reformulation given the overwhelming evidence for an evolving creation.
PSCF 62, no. 3 (2010): 179-195
By John Schneider, on August 5th, 2010
by John R. Schneider
Recent genomic science strongly supports the theory of common ancestry. To classical Protestants, particularly, this theory seems incompatible with Scripture, most especially with the “historical Fall,” which Protestants presume to be manifestly biblical and so have cemented it securely into their confessions and theology as a whole. Nevertheless, John Schneider proposes that it is important for traditional Protestants to consider alternatives to this essentially “Augustinian” view. He invites readers to examine Eastern thinking (mainly in Irenaeus of Lyon) together with a minority of Protestants (such as Karl Barth and supralapsarian Calvinists), for whom the Incarnation and Atonement are the purpose of creation from the beginning. Their understanding differs from the execution of divine “Plan B,” as implied by the Augustinian western version of an unintended “fall” from utopian first conditions. Schneider appeals to a fresh reading of the book of Job in support of an “aesthetic supralapsarianism,” which sustains Protestant virtues of biblical authority, divine sovereignty, and grace, while opening avenues to compatibility with evolutionary science.
PSCF 62, no. 3 (2010): 196-212
By D Gareth Jones, on May 19th, 2010
by D. Gareth Jones
“Peering into the brain” has a number of connotations: from directly examining aspects of the functioning of an individual’s brain and hence what that individual may be thinking, to investigating the power of neuroscience to provide insights into characteristic features of our humanity. This article picks up on these different connotations and surveys several . . . → Read More: Peering into People’s Brains: Neuroscience’s Intrusion into Our Inner Sanctum
By David Moberg, on May 19th, 2010
David O. Moberg
The rising popularity of spirituality is accompanied by a flood of research in numerous disciplines to probe its relationships with health, wellness, and countless other topics. Initially subsumed under religion, especially Christianity, and still overlapping with it, spirituality is increasingly treated as a distinct topic that applies to all religions and to persons who . . . → Read More: Spirituality Research: Measuring the Immeasurable?
By Kevin Seybold, on May 19th, 2010
by Kevin S. Seybold
The idea that there is a biological basis for human spirituality is controversial to many people. There is, nevertheless, a growing body of empirical evidence coming from neuroscience, psychology, cognitive science, and related disciplines interpreted by some as suggestive of a biological basis for belief in God or the transcendent. The purpose of this . . . → Read More: Biology of Spirituality
By Thaddeus Trenn, on May 19th, 2010
by Thaddeus J. Trenn
Available neurological correlates of personal conscious experience can often be detected, identified, and measured objectively. Substituting neurological correlates uncritically for personal conscious experience per se, if unintended, would constitute the error of reductionism. If intended, such substitution reflects decisions already taken on basic and highly contentious issues concerning the acceptable nature of the human . . . → Read More: Conscious Experience and Science: Signs of Transition
By Paul Moes, on May 18th, 2010
by Paul Moes
This article addresses concerns that the “nonreductive physicalism” (NRP) approach to understanding human nature may lead to a new form of determinism. The principal thesis of the article is that we can retain the idea of willful and responsible action even within the NRP perspective. Three additional positions are advanced: (1) Emotional processes are . . . → Read More: Minding Emotions: The Embodied Nature of Emotional Self-Regulation
By John Compton, on April 13th, 2010
by John J. Compton
Perhaps one never knows one’s parents, really knows them. You never know their early lives and, as a kid, you are living inside your own skin, not theirs. Growing up in Chicago, I never knew my dad was famous. He was just a firm, affectionate, if too busy father figure, who loved music . . . → Read More: Arthur Holly Compton: The Adventures of a Citizen Scientist
|
|
|
Recent Comments