RE: The Fall is not science, was : RTB vs Dick Fischer

I should like to see from you explanation what role Jesus the Christ play in it?
 
Moorad

________________________________

From: RFaussette@aol.com [mailto:RFaussette@aol.com]
Sent: Mon 4/17/2006 12:37 PM
To: Alexanian, Moorad; d.nield@auckland.ac.nz
Cc: drsyme@cablespeed.com; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: The Fall is not science, was : RTB vs Dick Fischer

In a message dated 4/16/2006 9:15:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, alexanian@uncw.edu writes:

        The laws of nature are generalizations of historical propositions. One cannot generalize from a unique event. Therefore, the Fall of Man is outside the realm of science but may have occurred in which case it would be a historical, not scientific, question.
        
        
        Moorad

It was not a unique event, Moorad. It was an evolution. The viewpoint that men and animals possess different natures is not an event. It is an understanding -- an understanding the biblical author possessed and sought to explain in the fall of Adam and Eve.
Today, we know that the process of evolution caused the difference between men and animals, between instinct and learned behavior.
The biblical author did not know the process, only its effects, so explained it "uniquely."
Today we know the process and its effects and know that man "fell" when his behavior was no longer intuitive and we know he is redeemed when his learned behavior (learned behavior = the Law) once again becomes intuitive which is to say once more "written on his heart."
 
For each concept the biblical author presents, there is a rational analog that does not require a scientific investigation to see.
 
rich faussette
Received on Mon Apr 17 12:49:14 2006