RE: Original Sin (was Re: RATE)

From: Alexanian, Moorad (alexanian@uncw.edu)
Date: Mon Oct 06 2003 - 18:31:55 EDT

  • Next message: Keith Miller: "Re: Original Sin (was Re: RATE)"

    All is history. Even scientific facts are historical events and laws of nature nothing but generalizations of historical prepositions. You are viewing history within the context of evolutionary theory and that is your right. Your quoting books do not change the fact that you are dealing with a working assumptions and not with actual historical events. Questions of the origin of man and the universe give rise to many speculations but do not add anything to the development of 99.99% of science and its uses.

     

    Moorad

            -----Original Message-----
            From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Michael Roberts
            Sent: Mon 10/6/2003 6:01 PM
            To: Ted Davis; RFaussette@aol.com; gmurphy@raex.com; bnelson301@yahoo.com
            Cc: asa@calvin.edu; hvantill@chartermi.net; jbembe@hotmail.com
            Subject: Re: Original Sin (was Re: RATE)
            
            

            Yes the Fall is the most well supported of all doctrines. But what do you
            mean by historical with the Fall? At some point an ape became human and
            along with that the propensity to sin. Is that a historical fall? See
            Peacocke Creation and the World of Science espec p 193.
            
            Ted is right to see that the doctrine of the Fall is the pivot to YEC as
            they present the case if a snake did not deceive Eve then all doctrine up to
            the atonement collapse like skittles. It has superficial great appeal as doe
            the argument that there was no death before the Fall as the wages of sin is
            death.
            
            Michael
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Ted Davis" <TDavis@messiah.edu>
            To: <RFaussette@aol.com>; <gmurphy@raex.com>; <bnelson301@yahoo.com>
            Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>; <hvantill@chartermi.net>; <jbembe@hotmail.com>
            Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 8:26 PM
            Subject: Re: Original Sin (was Re: RATE)
            
            
    > Yes, I agree that original sin is *true*, indeed Neibuhr or Chesterton
    > (can't remember which, can someone help?) once said that original sin was
    > the most empirically verified theological belief we have.
    >
    > Romans 5:12 clearly teaches that we *are* all sinners, that we are all
            like
    > Adam in this respect. The question is, what is the *theory* of original
            sin
    > as vs the doctrine of original sin?
    >
    > The "fall" is real, in that we all harbor a great capacity for wickedness,
    > rebellion against the Almighty in various forms. Whether the "fall" is
            also
    > historical, is another question.
    >
    > ted
    >
    >
    >
            
            



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 06 2003 - 18:32:06 EDT