DOCSLIB.ORG

PERSPECTIVES on Science and Christian Faith

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PERSPECTIVES on Science and Christian Faith PERSPECTIVES on Science and Christian Faith JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC AFFILIATION In This Issue … New Ideas in Evolutionary Biology: From NDMS to EES Human Evolution and a Cultural Understanding of Original Sin A Proposed Model for the Evolutionary Creation of Human Beings: From the Image of God to the Origin of Sin Beyond the Cosmic Fall and Natural Evil “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom.” Psalm 111:10 VOLUME 68, NUMBER 1 MARCH 2016 (US ISSN 0892-2675) (CPM #40927506) Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith Manuscript Guidelines © 2016 by the American Scientifi c Affi liation The pages of Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith (PSCF) are open Editor to original, unpublished contributions that interact with science and Christian JAMES C. PETERSON (Roanoke College and faith in a manner consistent with scientifi c and theological integrity. A brief Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine) description of standards for publication in PSCF can be found in the lead 221 College Lane editorial of the December 2013 issue. This is available at www.asa3.org under Salem, VA 24153 publications PSCF index. Published papers do not refl ect any offi cial [email protected] position of the American Scientifi c Affi liation. 1. Submit all manuscripts to: James C. Peterson, Editor, Roanoke College, Book Review Editors 221 College Lane, Salem, VA 24153. E-mail: [email protected]. PATRICK FRANKLIN (Providence University College Submissions are typically acknowledged within 10 days of their receipt. and Seminary), Coordinating Editor 2. Authors must submit an electronic copy of the manuscript formatted 10 College Crescent in Word as an email attachment. Typically 2–3 anonymous reviewers Otterburne, MB R0A 1G0 critique each manuscript considered for publication. [email protected] 3. Use endnotes for all references. Each note must have a unique number. Follow The Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed., sections 14.1 to 14.317). ARIE LEEGWATER (Calvin College) 4. While fi gures and diagrams may be embedded within the Word text fi le 1726 Knollcrest Circle SE of the manuscript, authors are required to also send them as individual Grand Rapids, MI 49546 electronic fi les (JPEG or PDF format). Figure captions should be provided [email protected] as a list at the end of the manuscript text. SARA SYBESMA TOLSMA (Northwestern College) ARTICLES are major treatments of a particular subject relating science to a 101 7th St SW Christian position. Such papers should be at least 2,000 words but not more Orange City, IA 51041 than 8,000 words in length, excluding endnotes. An abstract of 50–150 [email protected] words is required. Publication for such papers normally takes 9–12 months from the time of acceptance. HEATHER LOOY (The King’s University) 9125 - 50th Street COMMUNICATIONS are brief treatments of a wide range of subjects of Edmonton, AB T6B 2H3 interest to PSCF readers. Communications must not be longer than 2700 [email protected] words, excluding endnotes. Communications are normally published 6–9 months from the time of acceptance. DEREK SCHUURMAN (Redeemer University College) BOOK REVIEWS serve both to alert readers to new books that appear 777 Garner Rd E signifi cant and to engage these books in critical interaction. When a subject Ancaster, ON L9K 1J4 area editor selects a book for review, the book is then offered to a scholar [email protected] with the best match in expertise. ASA/CSCA members who would like to be considered as potential reviewers are welcome to express interest to the book Editorial Board review coordinating editor for inclusion in the reviewer database. Publishers ROBERT BISHOP, Wheaton College may also contact the book review coordinating editor if they are not sure DOROTHY BOORSE, Gordon College which subject area reviewer would best consider a particular book. WALTER L. BRADLEY, Baylor University • Patrick Franklin ([email protected]): book review coordinating STEPHEN M. CONTAKES, Westmont College editor; subject areas: ethics, philosophy, and theology. EDWARD B. DAVIS, Messiah College OWEN GINGERICH, Harvard-Smithsonian Center • Arie Leegwater ([email protected]): cosmology, history of science, for Astrophysics mathematics, and physical sciences. STEVEN G. HALL, Louisiana State University • Sara Sybesma Tolsma ([email protected]): biology, environment, RANDALL D. ISAAC, American Scientifi c Affi liation genetics, and origins. D. GARETH JONES, University of Otago • Heather Looy ([email protected]): anthropology, neurology, ROBERT KAITA, Princeton University psychology, and sociology. TREMPER LONGMAN III, Westmont College • Derek Schuurman ([email protected]): computers, engi- KERI MCFARLANE, The King’s University neering, and technology. KEITH B. MILLER, Kansas State University GEORGE L. MURPHY, Trinity Lutheran Seminary The viewpoints expressed in the books reviewed, and in the reviews ALAN G. PADGETT, Luther Seminary themselves, are those of the authors and reviewers respectively, and do not ANGELA SABATES, Bethel University refl ect an offi cial position of the ASA. RALPH STEARLEY, Calvin College JUDITH A. TORONCHUK, Trinity Western University LETTERS to the Editor concerning PSCF content may be published unless DAVID L. WILCOX, Eastern University marked not for publication. Letters submitted for publication must not be longer than 700 words and will be subject to editorial review. Letters are to be submitted as electronic copies. Letters accepted for publication will be Managing Editor published within 6 months. LYN BERG (American Scientifi c Affi liation) 218 Boston Street, Suite 208 ADVERTISING is accepted in PSCF, subject to editorial approval. Please Topsfi eld, MA 01983 address inquiries for rates or further information to the Managing Editor. [email protected] The ASA cannot take responsibility for any orders placed with advertisers in PSCF and does not imply endorsement by carrying the ad. Manuscript Editor ESTHER MARTIN AUTHORIZATION TO PHOTOCOPY MATERIAL for internal, personal, or educational classroom use, or the internal or personal use of specifi c clients, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith is granted by ASA, ISSN: 0892-2675, provided that the appropriate fee is (USPS 28-3740, ISSN 0892-2675) is published paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, quarterly by American Scientifi c Affi liation, 218 Boston Danvers, MA 01923 USA for conventional use, or check CCC online at the Street Suite 208, Topsfi eld, MA 01983. Periodicals following address: www.copyright.com/. No registration with CCC is needed: postage paid at Topsfi eld, MA, and additional mailing simply identify the article being copied, the number of copies, and the journal offi ce. POSTMASTER: Send address changes title (Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith). For those who wish to to: Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, request permission for other kinds of copying or reprinting, kindly write to 218 Boston Street Suite 208, Topsfi eld, MA 01983. the Managing Editor. Editorial The Science and Theology of Creation and Sin James C. Peterson his is the fi rst issue of PSCF since I took part in At the start of this issue of PSCF, Sy Garte describes the International Summit on Human Gene Edit- considerable ferment throughout the development of Ting. The National Academy of Sciences of the life and throughout the current study of it. He writes, USA, the National Academy of Medicine of the USA, To the standard paradigm of slow accumulation of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the Royal Soci- random point mutations as the major mechanism of ety of the UK jointly gathered the scientists directly biological variation must now be added new data involved (and some advisors) to share the latest and concepts of symbiosis, gene duplication, hori- developments, and to consider the best societal use, zontal gene transfer, retrotransposition, epigenetic of the newest gene-editing techniques. Every once in control networks, niche construction, stress-direct- a while there is a trigger that accelerates discovery ed mutations, and large-scale reengineering of the and development in a particular fi eld. CRISPR-Cas9 genome in response to environmental stimuli. appears to be such a technology for understanding, Garte argues that we should recognize these fur- and precisely changing, the genes that are central to ther inputs in an “extended evolutionary synthesis,” life. There will be much from CRISPR-Cas9 for us to and that such should open us to realize that it is not learn and think through in the coming years. just random events that develop life. God might The development of CRISPR-Cas9 is an example of not only have started a planned unfolding of life, how fast the sciences keep moving. The sciences, what Howard Van Till called in this journal a “fully and theology too, are, of course, both human con- gifted creation.” God might well intervene among or structs. Hence, from a limited perspective, they try to through these many newly recognized inputs, along understand our world. Science focuses on our mate- the way. rial universe; theology, on God and what God has revealed. All one has to do is to look at the night sky Our second article listens to the evidence that we and what we can see of hundreds of billions of other human beings are at our core inherently cultured galaxies, to start to sense how little we know of what beings. Benno van den Toren notes that this experi- is. It is a privilege and a delight to make each step ence of culture is not optional for human beings. It toward better understanding. Many of those steps in has always been central to our survival and who we the sciences do not tell us much about theology, and are. He sees recognizing this characteristic of our ori- there are points of theology that do not further our gin and ongoing nature as potentially insightful for science. understanding how sin originated and spread.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Extinction, Natural Evil, and the Cosmic Cross
    Evolutionary Theodicy with Denis Edwards, “Christopher Southgate’s Compound Theodicy: Parallel Searchings”; Ted Peters, “Extinction, Natural Evil, and the Cosmic Cross”; Robert John Russell, “Southgate’s Compound Only-Way Evolutionary Theodicy: Deep Appreciation and Further Directions”; Bethany Sollereder, “Exploring Old and New Paths in Theodicy”; Holmes Rolston, III, “Redeeming a Cruciform Nature”; Ernst M. Conradie, “On Social Evil and Natural Evil: In Conversation with Christopher Southgate”; Philip Clayton and Steven Knapp, “Evolution, Contingency, and Christology”; John F. Haught, “Faith and Compassion in an Unfinished Universe”; Celia Deane-Drummond, “Perceiving Natural Evil through the Lens of Divine Glory? A Conversation with Christopher Southgate”; Nicola Hoggard Creegan, “Theodicy: A Response to Christopher Southgate”; and Neil Messer, “Evolution and Theodicy: How (Not) to Do Science and Theology.” EXTINCTION, NATURAL EVIL, AND THE COSMIC CROSS by Ted Peters Abstract. Did the God of the Bible create a Darwinian world in which violence and suffering (disvalue) are the means by which the good (value) is realized? This is Christopher Southgate’s insightful and dramatic formulation of the theodicy problem. In addressing this problem, the Exeter theologian rightly invokes the Theology of the Cross in its second manifestation, that is, we learn from the cross of Jesus Christ that God is present to nonhuman as well as human victims of predation and extinction. God co-suffers with creatures in their despair, abandonment, physical suffering, and death. What I will add with more force than Southgate is this: the Easter resurrection is a prolepsis of the eschatological new creation, and it is God’s new creation which retroactively determines past creation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Evil S2
    Theodicy Episode 190 THE PROBLEM OF EVIL S2 I. KEY THOUGHTS S3 1. The existence of evil is the greatest challenge for theism. S4 1. “There is little doubt that the problem of evil is the most serious intellectual difficulty for theism.” Stephen Davis, Encountering Evil (Knox Press, 1981), 2 THE PROBLEM S5 IF God is all-knowing, THEN he must know about evil IF God is all-loving, THEN he must want to abolish evil IF God is all-powerful, THEN he must be able to abolish evil BUT evil exists THEREFORE God is not all-loving & not all-powerful OR God does not exist THE SOLUTION S6 Theodicy èåïò (theos) God äéêç (dikç) justice DEF: arguments justifying the existence of evil in a world created by an all-loving, all-powerful, and all-knowing God 2. ALL theodicies include the notion of “Greater Good” S7 God allows evil because it serves an ultimate purpose in bringing overall good into the world º EG selling of Joseph by his brothers he ends up in Egypt & his family is saved from famine S8 2. “You [his brothers] intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.” Gen 50:20 3. Christian Theodicies have been intimately connected to Gen 3 & the Fall S9 K especially the COSMIC FALL Protestant Reformer John Calvin S10 3. “The earth was cursed on account of Adam [Gen 3:18] ... the whole order of nature was subverted by the sin of man ... Moses does not enumerate all the disadvantages in which man, by sin, has involved himself; for it appears that all the evils of the present life, which experience proves to be innumerable, have proceeded from the same fountain.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lions Seek Their Prey from God: a Commentary on the Boyle Lecture
    S & CB (2005), 17, 41–56 0954–4194 R.J. BERRY The Lions Seek Their Prey from God: a Commentary on the Boyle Lecture John Haught asks how we can reconcile evolution with the idea of divine prov- idence: ‘The major question for theology, now as in the years immediately sub- sequent to the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species, is how to reconcile the brute impersonality and blindness … in evolution’s recipe with trust in divine providence.’ In his book Can a Darwinian be a Christian? Michael Ruse1 focuses on the same point. He identifies as ‘the biggest question of all for the Christian believer is the “theodicy” problem. If, as the Christian believes, God is omnipotent and all-loving, then why evil? If He is all-powerful, He could pre- vent evil, and if he is all-loving, then He would prevent evil. Yet evil exists.’ For some this is a definitive proof against the sort of God revealed in the Bible. David Hull2 has written, The evolutionary process is rife with happenstance, contingency, incredible waste, death, pain and horror … Whatever the God implied by evolutionary theory and the data of natural selection may be like, he is not the Protes- tant God of waste not, want not. He is also not the loving God who cares about his productions. He is not even the awful God pictured in the Book of Job. [He] is careless, wasteful, indifferent, almost diabolical. He is certainly not the sort of God to whom anyone would be inclined to pray. This is the sort of interpretation which led to the notorious conclusion of Richard Dawkins3, that ‘Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually ful- filled atheist’.
    [Show full text]
  • Creation and Theodicy: Protological Presuppositions in Evolutionary Theodicy
    Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 25/2 (2014): 3-28. Article copyright © 2014 by Adriani Milli Rodrigues. Creation and Theodicy: Protological Presuppositions in Evolutionary Theodicy Adriani Milli Rodrigues Adventist University of Sao Paulo, Brazil There are different positions regarding the understanding of the doctrine of creation in the face of the challenge of the evolutionary concept of origins. In broad terms, while some deny the theory of evolution1 in favor of a literal interpretation of the Genesis account of creation, many scholars attempt to comprehend this doctrine in certain consonance with that theory.2 1 The present study acknowledges the distinction between macroevolution and microevolution. The references to evolution in this text imply the concept of macroevolution. While microevolution refers to small changes within one species, macroevolution describes “the evolution of major new characteristics that make organisms recognizable as a new species, genus, family, or higher taxon.” Stanley A. Rice, Encyclopedia of Evolution (New York: Infobase, 2009), 253. This distinction between microevolution and macroevolution is used, for example, by Stephen Jay Gould. See S. J. Gould, The Panda’s Thumb: More Reflections in Natural History, reissued ed. (New York: Norton, 1992), 187-192. 2 Edward B. Davis indicates “four main patterns” that “govern most religious responses to evolution today: complementary” (“theological truths exist in a higher realm apart from scientific truths”), conflict against evolution (“rejection of evolution”), conflict against Christianity (“rejection of Christianity”), and “doctrinal reformulation” (“rejection of divine transcendence and the wholesale reformulation of traditional Christian doctrine”). Edward B. Davis, “The Word and the Works: Concordism and American Evangelicals,” in Perspectives on an Evolving Creation, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Discourse: a Way Forward for Theistic Evolutionism?
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Helsingin yliopiston digitaalinen arkisto NZSTh 2018; 60(3): 435–451 Erkki Vesa Rope Kojonen* Design Discourse: A Way Forward for Theistic Evolutionism? https://doi.org/10.1515/nzsth-2018-0025 Summary: It is usually supposed that biological design arguments (where biologi- cal complex order is seen as evidence of a Creator) are made obsolete by Darwi- nian evolutionary theory. However, philosopher Alvin Plantinga and others have defended the continued possibility of a rational “design discourse”, in which biological order is taken as a sign of God’s purposeful action. In this article, I consider two objections to design discourse: (1) a theological objection to biologi- cal design based on the problem of natural evil, and (2) the evolutionary objec- tion, according to which evolutionary theory removes the justification for any biological design perception. Whereas Plantinga’s own response utilizes the arguments of the Intelligent Design movement, I argue in favor of utilizing “de- sign discourse” as part of a theistic evolutionist view. Keywords: theistic evolutionism, teleology, design argument, problem of natural evil, Alvin Plantinga Zusammenfassung: Es wird gemeinhin angenommen, dass biologische Design Argumente (welche die komplexe biologische Ordnung als Beweis für einen Schöpfer erachten) durch Darwins Evolutionstheorie obsolet werden. Der Philo- soph Alvin Plantinga und andere haben jedoch die Möglichkeit eines fortgeführ- ten rationalen „Design Diskurses“ verteidigt, der die biologische Ordnung als ein Zeichen Gottes zielgerichteter Handlung begreift. In diesem Artikel betrachte ich zwei Einwände gegen den Design Diskurs: (1) einen theologischen Einwand zum biologischen Design basierend auf dem Problem der natürlichen Übel und (2) den evolutionären Einwand, nach dem die Evolutionstheorie die Berechtigung jeder biologischen Design Vorstellung aufhebt.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Dissertation
    Animal Suffering in an Unfallen World: A Theodicy of Non-Human Evolution Submitted by Bethany Noël Sollereder to the University of Exeter as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology In October 2014 This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. Signature: ………………………………………………………….. !2 Abstract The publication of The Origin of Species in 1859 raised a host of theological issues. Chief amongst them is the question of how a good, loving, and powerful God could create through an evolutionary process that involved so much suffering, pain, and violence. The traditional Christian answers for suffering in the natural world are not plausible in an evolutionary world. We cannot blame natural evil on human sin, since earth history shows that non- human suffering long preceded humans. Nor can we say that God allows suffering because it allows opportunity for moral choice, spiritual closeness with God, and the development of virtue, as none of these apply to the non-human realm. A new approach is needed to address the question of suffering and violence amongst non-human animals. In this dissertation, I address the question of evolutionary suffering with a multi-disciplinary approach of biblical studies, philosophical theology, and systematic theology to build a compound theodicy.
    [Show full text]
  • Catherine A. Wright
    In the Darkness Grows the Green: The Promise of a New Cosmological Horizon of Meaning Within a Critical Inquiry of Human Suffering and the Cross by Catherine A. Wright A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Regis College and the Theology Department of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael's College © Copyright by Catherine A. Wright 2015 In The Darkness Grows the Green: The Promise of a New Cosmological Horizon of Meaning Within a Critical Inquiry of Human Suffering and the Cross Catherine A. Wright Doctor of Philosophy in Theology Regis College and the University of St. Michael’s College 2015 Abstract Humans have been called “mud of the earth,”i organic stardust animated by the Ruah of our Creator,ii and microcosms of the macrocosm.iii Since we now understand in captivating detail how humanity has emerged from the cosmos, then we must awaken to how humanity is “of the earth” in all the magnificence and brokenness that this entails. This thesis will demonstrate that there are no easy answers nor complete theological systems to derive satisfying answers to the mystery of human suffering. Rather, this thesis will uncover aspects of sacred revelation offered in and through creation that could mould distinct biospiritual human imaginations and cultivate the Earth literacy required to construct an ecological theological anthropology (ETA). It is this ecocentric interpretive framework that could serve as vital sustenance and a vision of hope for transformation when suffering befalls us.
    [Show full text]
  • Theodicy for a World in Process: God and the Existence of Evil in an Evolving Universe
    Quodlibet Journal: Volume 2 Number 4, Fall 2000 ISSN: 1526-6575 http://www.Quodlibet.net Theodicy for a World in Process: God and the Existence of Evil in an Evolving Universe © Ross L. Stein Abstract The existence of pain and suffering is a source of profound anxiety to all reflective people of faith, for how do we sustain theistic belief in the face of the world's evils? Despite centuries of theological and philosophical reflection, a theodicy of adequate explanatory power has yet to be formulated. The theodicies which have been advanced have failed, in large part, due to their metaphysical deficiencies, including inadequate cosmologies, anthropologies, and descriptions of divine attributes. In this paper, I develop a theodicy that more faithfully reflects what we now know about humanity and the universe. I argue that both moral and natural evil can only be understood in the context of a God who creates evolutively. I first outline a theology of evolution based on a critical realistic appraisal of humanity's experiences of both the material world and the numinous. I make the case that a coherent theology must be true to both the evolutionary origins of humanity as well as to humanity's ubiquitous religious experiences. The development of this theodicy is a prerequisite to the overall theodicy project of this paper. Here, I consider as separate topics: (1) moral evil and the possibility of free will and (2) natural evil and divine action. Concerning the former, I argue against causal determinism in favor of true free will for humans and maintain that moral evil results from authentic choices of humans to do evil.
    [Show full text]
  • Zygon 53(2018):739-751 REDEEMING a CRUCIFORM NATURE by Holmes Rolston
    Zygon 53(2018):739-751 REDEEMING A CRUCIFORM NATURE by Holmes Rolston, III Abstract. Christopher Southgate recognizes that the natural world is both ambiguous, mixing goods and bads, and simultaneously dramatically creative, such creativity resulting from just this ambiguous challenge of environmental conductance and resistance. Life is lived in green pastures and in the valley of the shadow of death. Perhaps this is the only way God could have created the values found on Earth, by means of such disvalues, as a Darwinian natural selection account suggests. Generating Earth’s biodiversity requires struggle, success, and failure—and such an only way would constrain a powerful, loving God. But Southgate judges this too uncaring of suffering individuals, the products of evolution sacrificed to the systemic process. Perhaps God through Jesus redeems all the sacrificed individuals—pelicans in a pelican heaven—but redemption of all the bullfrogs and acorns becomes an incredible hope. Nature is a cruciform creation, where life persists in perpetual perishing. Life is forever conserved, regenerated, redeemed. Keywords: cruciform creation; evolution; Christopher Southgate; suffering Christopher Southgate has been at the forefront of advancing the discussion of evolutionary theodicy since his landmark 2008 contribution, The Groaning of Creation. In this article, I outline six primary contributions Holmes Rolston, III, is University Distinguished Professor and Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA; e-mail: [email protected]. 739 740 that Southgate’s work has introduced and develop them further, a sort of fugue on Southgate’s themes. AMBIGUOUS NATURE AND CREATIVE GENESIS “God is the author of an ambiguous world” (Southgate 2015, 245).
    [Show full text]
  • IRAMAT - CRP2A Université Bordeaux Montaigne – CNRS
    IRAMAT - CRP2A Université Bordeaux Montaigne – CNRS PRODUCTION SCIENTIFIQUE Doc actualisé le 11/01/2016 ACL – Articles dans des revues internationales ou nationales avec comité de lecture répertoriées par l’AERES ou dans les bases de données internationales ASCL - Articles dans des revues sans comité de lecture INV - Conférences invitées ACTI - Actes d’un colloque international ACTN - Actes d’un colloque national COM - Communications orales dans un congrés national ou international AFF - Communications par poster dans un congrés national ou international OS - Ouvrages scientifiques (ou chapitres de ces ouvrages) DO - Direction d’ouvrages ou de revues AP - Autres productions académiques Responsabilité éditoriale, comité éditorial, comité de lecture Film, Site internet, Compte rendu d’ouvrage, préfaces Rapports d’opérations scientifiques BDD - Bases de Données LOG - Logiciels COLL - Colloques et séminaires Participation à l’organisation de colloques Participation au comité scientifique de colloques Organisation de séminaires ou de journées d’études ConfSem - Conférences dans le cadre de séminaires, réunions scientifiques d’équipes FoCo – Formation Continue : organisation, intervention UMR 5060 — IRAMAT- CRP2A Publications et Productions scientifiques 2009-2015 1 ResAc - Insertion dans les réseaux académiques Expertise Appartenance à des conseils, organisations ou réseaux professionnels Membre d’Association professionnelle, sociétés savantes HDR DOC - Thèses de Doctorat Thèses soutenues Doctorats en cours Masters pilotés par des membres
    [Show full text]
  • Nuevos Horizontes En La Investigación Del Arte Prehistórico. Cuestiones
    NUEVOS HORIZONTES EN LA INVESTIGACIÓN DEL ARTE PREHISTÓRICO: CUESTIONES GENERALES Y ESTADO DE LA CUESTIÓN por ANTONIO BELTRÁN Los frecuentes descubrimientos de yacimientos con arte prehistórico en la Península Ibérica han introducido cambios importantes en las ideas gene­ ralmente admitidas, tanto respecto del arte paleolítico como del llamado «le­ vantino», y desde luego en el arte «esquemático». Los esquemas impuestos por la autoridad del abate H. BREUIL, de A. LEROI-GOURHAN y, en cierto modo, por la de E. RIPOLL y nosotros mismos, han provocado que fueran tenidas como excepciones observaciones que contradecían objetivamente los pragmatismos citados de cómodo manejo y que se incorporaban marginal- mente, a lo sumo, a sucesivas puestas al día que, al poco tiempo, quedaban a su vez anticuadas al no modificar la base de los problemas y limitarse a aceptar supuestos «datos anómalos» que al multiplicarse obligan a una revi­ sión de los problemas hasta ahora admitidos como indiscutibles, lo que nos proponemos realizar en este breve artículo. Dado que hemos de exponer nuestras discutibles opiniones, deberá perdo­ nársenos que citemos algunos trabajos nuestros, recientes o todavía en pren­ sa, que han de servirnos como punto de partida para evitar repeticiones inne­ cesarias que extenderían excesivamente las presentes notas. Nos referimos, sobre todo, aparte de las citas que figuran más adelante, a nuestro plantea­ miento del estado de la cuestión sobre el arte paleolítico español presentado al Coloquio de PERIGUEUX-LE THOT, 1984: El arte parietal paleolítico español: Estado de la cuestión según los últimos descubrimientos (a propósito del Coloquio Internacional de Perigueux-Le Thot, 19-22 noviembre, 1984), «Arqueología», Madrid, 1985, VI, 48, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Naturalistic Versus Eschatological Theologies of Evolution Junghyung Kim Junghyung Kim
    Article Naturalistic versus Eschatological Theologies of Evolution Junghyung Kim Junghyung Kim In this article I pose two primary questions. (1) How is God’s action in the evolutionary process to be understood with regard to seemingly self-explanatory evolutionary novelties, novelties with no telos inherent within them? (2) How can Christian affirmation of divine action in evolution be reconciled with the massive yet unavoidable evil and suffering involved in the evolutionary process? This article explores the answers to the questions by explicating two major figures in the contemporary science-theology dialogue: Arthur Peacocke and Wolfhart Pannenberg. They represent quite contrasting positions within the camp of theistic evolution. I term them respectively “naturalistic” and “eschatological.” I will analyze their positions in terms of their fundamental metaphysical commitments and respective answers to the two questions mentioned above. This analysis aims first to make explicit the contrasting points between two different approaches and then to lay the foundation for a theology of evolution going beyond them. an we believe in God and evolu- natural selection, common descent, Ction at the same time? Ted Peters divine action, and theodicy.3 This short and Martinez Hewlett answer: article cannot address all these impor- yes, we can. But we can do so only if we tant subjects. Nevertheless, with a spe- do not confuse evolutionary biology with cific focus on God’s relation to the a natural science and atheistic material- history of biological evolution, I will pay ism.1 In other words, given that the special attention to the issues of divine distinction between methodological and action and theodicy.
    [Show full text]