// Required code

Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Theistic Evolution And The Fall Of Man?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Theistic Evolution And The Fall Of Man?

    The reason I'm posting this here is that this is where I have seen those who hold this view. But if A moderator wants to move it that is fine.

    OK, how theistic evolutionists deal with the fall of man and sin:

    Rom.5

    Death in Adam, Life in Christ

    12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

    15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. 17 For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

    18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. 20 Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

    So it seems clear that sin and death (whether just human death or spiritual death) entered the human condition by one man. Was there a literal Adam? A man who is the biological father of all living human beings?
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

  • #2
    This is natural science?

    Comment


    • #3
      Easy -- humans are evolved animals and as such have instincts of self-preservation. Having a large enough cerebrum to make moral judgments gives humans a moral responsibility that other animals don't have. Humans can effect actions that are detrimental to other humans -- the concept of injustice, intentional affliction of pain, etc.

      This makes a HELLUVA lot more sense than the Woman biting a piece of fruit and convincing the Man to do so -- thus cursing ALL future generations to an eternity in Hell.

      Geesh!

      K54

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by phank View Post
        This is natural science?
        ,
        Seer ("random is random, chance is chance, evilution is blind luck") must think so.

        Any one who believes in "literal" Genesis Kreation (God has hands and lungs) and Fludde stories cannot intrinsically distinguish natural science from mythology.

        K54

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
          Easy -- humans are evolved animals and as such have instincts of self-preservation. Having a large enough cerebrum to make moral judgments gives humans a moral responsibility that other animals don't have. Humans can effect actions that are detrimental to other humans -- the concept of injustice, intentional affliction of pain, etc.

          This makes a HELLUVA lot more sense than the Woman biting a piece of fruit and convincing the Man to do so -- thus cursing ALL future generations to an eternity in Hell.

          Geesh!

          K54
          Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
          ,
          Seer ("random is random, chance is chance, evilution is blind luck") must think so.

          Any one who believes in "literal" Genesis Kreation (God has hands and lungs) and Fludde stories cannot intrinsically distinguish natural science from mythology.

          K54
          For a moment there, I mistook your icon for Sparko's. It was a very confusing moment. :clueless


          I'd probably quibble with the bit about moral judgments being a function of cerebrum size. Last I've heard, the fundamental physiological components of emotion are demonstratively present in all mammals (if not vertebrates). Invertebrates are a lot harder to deal with, but there are markers there, too. To whatever extent our brain impacts our morality, I'm unconvinced we're the only animals with it. Even rats seem to demonstrate empathy.
          I'm not here anymore.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by seer View Post
            The reason I'm posting this here is that this is where I have seen those who hold this view. But if A moderator wants to move it that is fine.

            OK, how theistic evolutionists deal with the fall of man and sin:

            Rom.5

            Death in Adam, Life in Christ




            So it seems clear that sin and death (whether just human death or spiritual death) entered the human condition by one man. Was there a literal Adam? A man who is the biological father of all living human beings?
            There's a pretty wide spectrum of views among TE's on how to view Adam. Some TE's hold to a literal Adam whose body evolved from other animals but whose spirit was miraculously implanted by God. Some TE's view Adam as an archetype or as "everyman". Some view Adam as pure myth.

            For a detailed explanation of the various options, I recommend the recent book "Four Views on the Historical Adam".
            Last edited by Kbertsche; 03-02-2015, 04:06 PM.
            "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." – Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Kbertsche View Post
              There's a pretty wide spectrum of views among TE's on how to view Adam. Some TE's hold to a literal Adam whose body evolved from other animals but whose spirit was miraculously implanted by God. Some TE's view Adam as an archetype or as "everyman". Some view Adam as pure myth.

              For a detailed explanation of the various options, I recommend the recent book "Four Views on the Historical Adam".
              Thanks for the link, but I don't see how anything but a literal Adam who is the biological father of all men can be reconciled to the texts.
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by phank View Post
                This is natural science?
                It's likely the only forum seer is going to get full involvement from the TE's on the board.

                Jim
                He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by seer View Post
                  Thanks for the link, but I don't see how anything but a literal Adam who is the biological father of all men can be reconciled to the texts.
                  Why is this a problem?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
                    For a moment there, I mistook your icon for Sparko's. It was a very confusing moment. :clueless


                    I'd probably quibble with the bit about moral judgments being a function of cerebrum size. Last I've heard, the fundamental physiological components of emotion are demonstratively present in all mammals (if not vertebrates). Invertebrates are a lot harder to deal with, but there are markers there, too. To whatever extent our brain impacts our morality, I'm unconvinced we're the only animals with it. Even rats seem to demonstrate empathy.
                    Weak empathy perhaps. Weak empathy has been shown to be present in some apes.

                    Full-blown altruism is only present in (some!) humans.

                    Anyhoo, humans (unless they're brain-damaged) have the capacity to know right from wrong, hence the natural capacity for "sin".

                    Much more believable than the Ish and Ishah chomping on a literal piece of forbidden fruit.

                    K54

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by seer View Post
                      Thanks for the link, but I don't see how anything but a literal Adam who is the biological father of all men can be reconciled to the texts.
                      What you see is your own business.

                      K54

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by phank View Post
                        Why is this a problem?
                        Because paleontology, archaeology, anthropology, embryology, genetics contradict the literal first Man/Woman as ancestors of all humanity.

                        Of course a concrete-cranium YEC like seer can't accept that, since he learned about Adam and Eve in kindergarten-level Sundae Skool.



                        K54

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                          Because paleontology, archaeology, anthropology, embryology, genetics contradict the literal first Man/Woman as ancestors of all humanity.

                          Of course a concrete-cranium YEC like seer can't accept that, since he learned about Adam and Eve in kindergarten-level Sundae Skool.



                          K54
                          Klaus, you're not a TE, so why are you posting in this thread?
                          "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

                          "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                            Because paleontology, archaeology, anthropology, embryology, genetics contradict the literal first Man/Woman as ancestors of all humanity.

                            Of course a concrete-cranium YEC like seer can't accept that, since he learned about Adam and Eve in kindergarten-level Sundae Skool.



                            K54
                            But it seems to me that all seer has to do is select different texts, and all is reconciled. As you point out, he has plenty of compatible texts to choose from. Given the mind-boggling weight of every compatible text, it's an exercise in sheer perversity to cast about for the few that can't be reconciled -- and then complain about the results of this effort.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by seer View Post
                              Thanks for the link, but I don't see how anything but a literal Adam who is the biological father of all men can be reconciled to the texts.
                              If you don't want to know how TEs deal with Adam, why did you start a thread asking how TEs deal with Adam?

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-17-2020, 05:11 PM
                              7 responses
                              27 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-09-2020, 09:25 PM
                              0 responses
                              21 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by rogue06, 10-09-2020, 03:29 PM
                              6 responses
                              49 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-07-2020, 12:11 PM
                              0 responses
                              10 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by Sherman, 10-06-2020, 03:31 PM
                              33 responses
                              210 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Leonhard  
                              Working...
                              X