What Allen posted concerning the soul is standard SDA teaching, usually
described as "soul sleep." I consider the claims special pleading. The
nonreductionistic monism of Nancey Murphy and others happens to overlap
it. As I and Paul noted some time back, the latter group ignores all the
scriptures that do not fit their view. I will here go further and state
that nonreductive monism cannot accommodate the incarnation. I have
submitted a paper to EPS arguing this point.
Contrary to George's statement that the virgin birth or virginal
conception is not part of the ASA Statement of Faith, I believe that the
mention of the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds indicates that it is included.
I don't know what else may be made of "Born of the Virgin Mary" and "And
was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary." I believe in an
earlier post I noted that, apart from the virginal conception, the deity
would be acting exactly as demon possession is described, usurping the
individual's selfhood. I grant that the ecumenical creeds later than the
Nicene (the date of the current form of the Apostles' Creed is not
certain: it is not part of the Orthodox statements) elaborate the
statement about the Lord's nature, but they do not introduce either his
deity or his virgin birth.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 18 2002 - 00:12:56 EDT