RE: The wrong horse in evolution education

Peter Ruest's comment raises all sort so red flags with me. He wrote, in
part,

<snip>
"A question of time, of before and after, of inheritance, does not enter.
Abraham (John 8:56) was saved through Christ, although he lived 2 millennia
earlier, and all OT saints were saved through Christ. So why can't
pre-Adamites be responsible before God, and therefore sin, after the pattern
of Adam (modified by their amount of knowledge of God's law), and die - and
some be saved through Christ? Christ is the pattern of the new humanity
(both before and after his time on earth), and Adam is the pattern of the
old humanity (both before and after his time).

"At least for the time being, I see this as the most probable solution of
the
time problem mentioned. It implies the rejection of the dogma of the
inheritance of an original sin. And I believe this dogma is not biblical,
anyway. But of course, I retain the teaching that all humans are sinful,
lost, and in need of a Savior."

I don't have a problem with Christ's sacrifice being retroactive (in time)
so that it applies to Adam, Noah, David, etc., but would this apply to those
who were not "OT saints"? Peter uses the qualifying statement "and some
[could be] be saved through Christ." What would then determine who would be
included in the "some"? It cannot have been the knowledge of Christ because
He came later. If not knowledge, could it be anything other than "good
works"?

Am I missing something here?

Chuck
Received on Sat Apr 15 20:39:12 2006