For far from being a deviation from
biblical truth, this setting
of man over against the sum total
of things, his subject - status and the object - status and mutual externality
of things themselves, are posited in the very
idea of creation and
of man's position vis - a-vis nature determined by it: it is the condition
of man meant in the Bible, imposed by his createdness, to be accepted, acted through... In short, there are degrees
of objectification... the question is not how to devise an adequate language for theology, but how to keep its necessary inadequacy transparent for what is to be indicated by it...» Hans Jonas, Phenomenon
of Life, pp. 258 - 59; cf. also Schubert Ogden's helpful discussion on «Theology and Objectivity,» Journal
of Religion 45 (1965): 175 - 95; Ian G. Barbour, Issues in Science and Religion (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice - Hall, 1966), pp. 175 - 206; and Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1962).
It was a controversial interpretation for many, as it contradicted religious beliefs about human origins; the short, stocky limb bones and the skull's oversized brow suggested an ape - like ancestor that did not fit in with the
biblical idea of God's
creation.