shalamabobbi Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 Well, if Dembski really has generated such an insight - not that you'd know, since you've admitted to pulling a jaybear - then it more than implies that, for at least one of us at this forum, that individual is so limited.Well actually no. Simply an attempt to be polite..
Log Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 (edited) I'm not trying to be polite. If you haven't read the book, then read the book. If, after that, you feel there are issues, those can be discussed. Of course, if you're not interested, bow out.Frankly, I am rather tired of people who have not read, and do not understand, and therefore cannot give an accurate summation of, Dembski's work. Edited April 9, 2012 by Log
Cobalt-70 Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 The theology of the Fall necessitates man’s sinlessness before the fall. Evolution makes no such presumption. At what point did man become sinful before the fall; and when did he need to be saved; and saved from what? What law did he break that made him sinful?The theology only requires that humans before Adam and Eve were not morally responsible for their actions, because they didn't have knowledge of good and evil. And certainly, the notions of good and evil are rather recent constructions. I don't think pre-agricultural societies had such concepts. They apparently arose as part of organized religion.
shalamabobbi Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 I'm not trying to be polite. If you haven't read the book, then read the book. If, after that, you feel there are issues, those can be discussed. Of course, if you're not interested, bow out.Frankly, I am rather tired of people who have not read, and do not understand, and therefore cannot give an accurate summation of, Dembski's work.Jaybear..Is there a term for throwing a book of psuedo-science at somebody and demanding they read it, and if they refuse, declaring your argument the winner?Is the book the topic of the thread?The problem with these types of arguments are the same:You find fault with a theory. Not a real fault, just the appearance of one.Then you conveniently ignore the mountains of evidence that are left unexplained by your proposed scenario whatever it is.As for instance: Perhaps Demski would like to explain how the many ERVs found within the genome got there in the short span of a few thousand years?No? Didn't think so..
zerinus Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 (edited) Talmage saw the rocks Adam used to build an altar with and they had fossils. There was death before the Fall!I can think of many possible explanations for that, without resorting to Evolution.Every time you sin you are fallen, and every time the atonement of Christ brings you back into his presence, you are unfallen.Wrong. There was one Fall, and one redemption from the Fall.Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned; Edited April 9, 2012 by zerinus
altersteve Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 Wrong. There was one Fall, and one redemption from the Fall.So the term "Fall" only applies to the Fall of Adam, and cannot apply to our own individual "falls"?
Log Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 Perhaps Demski would like to explain how the many ERVs found within the genome got there in the short span of a few thousand years?No? Didn't think so..Perhaps because it's utterly irrelevant to the topic of Dembski's work. Do you know what the topic of Dembski's work is? No? Didn't think so.So, again, at least one of us on this forum is so limited...
shalamabobbi Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 I can think of many possible explanations for that, without resorting to Evolution.Wrong. There was one Fall, and one redemption from the Fall.Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned;Speaking of the alter of Adam..You may want to consider the ground under that alter. In fact under the entire state of Missouri you will find portions of the geologic column.
ERayR Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 (edited) Which is how evolution works, small separated populations.I'm not sure if calling it a defect would be offensive or not to a tribal member, but if there were a sufficiently large advantage to the change, it would become the new standard.I know how evolution works. In another life I was a livestock breeder(producer). It is used all the time to produce better animals. However I must say it is wholly directed by intelligent beings. So where are the moms with 4 arms? Edited April 9, 2012 by ERayR
shalamabobbi Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 So where is the moms with 4 arms? I think you find that in the Hindu religion..
zerinus Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 So the term "Fall" only applies to the Fall of Adam, and cannot apply to our own individual "falls"?There may be many falls, but there was only one Fall; and that is what Paul and I were talking about.
zerinus Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 Speaking of the alter of Adam..You may want to consider the ground under that alter. In fact under the entire state of Missouri you will find portions of the geologic column.As I said, there is more than one possible explanation for that. Evolution is not the be all and end all, contrary to what Evol worshippers think. 1
shalamabobbi Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 As I said, there is more than one possible explanation for that. Evolution is not the be all and end all, contrary to what Evol worshippers think.Such as what? I am curious as I've expended a great deal of my life traveling down this rabbit hole.
ERayR Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 I'm not trying to be polite. If you haven't read the book, then read the book. If, after that, you feel there are issues, those can be discussed. Of course, if you're not interested, bow out.Frankly, I am rather tired of people who have not read, and do not understand, and therefore cannot give an accurate summation of, Dembski's work.And they close there minds to any possibility they are wrong. Thus anyone such as Demski who might upset their comfortable little world is rejected out of hand.
zerinus Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 Such as what? I am curious as I've expended a great deal of my life traveling down this rabbit hole.If you are looking for rabbit holes, I don't have any.
shalamabobbi Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 If you are looking for rabbit holes, I don't have any.That's ok. I thought maybe you were in possesion of some new idea I haven't come across as yet. But that's probably not the case, so no worries. I don't wish to upset your apple cart.
altersteve Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 There may be many falls, but there was only one Fall; and that is what Paul and I were talking about....So which is it? Many or one?
zerinus Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 ...So which is it? Many or one?When we are talking about the Fall of Adam in the Garden of Eden, we are talking about the one.
thesometimesaint Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 I guess when Adam & Eve were "driven" out of the Garden is must have been in a Hummer limosinehttp://www.hummerlimo.com/images/index.1.jpg
Recommended Posts