PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     Evolution, Sin, and Death

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
Fencer27

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

This quote is from Lester, and I feel it hits on some key issues for the YEC person, so I feel that it deserves it own thread.

"Ultimately the Bible says man brought death into the world and evolution says death brought man into the world. They can’t both be right. If death brought man into the world then there was no need for Jesus Christ and you can throw the whole book out.Either Jesus was who he said he was or he was a liar, but his is the only body you won’t be finding anytime soon whereas you can go and pray to Mohammed’s and other religious leaders’ bones anytime you feel like it. The early Christians saw Jesus alive after he died on the cross. They faced death fearlessly after that because they knew what I know. He’s alive."

I don't have time right now to say much about it other than ask why can't death brought about by sin be spiritual only? Why does it have to include physical death?

(Edited by Fencer27 9/25/2009 at 07:40 AM).


-------
"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." - Jesus (Matthew 7:12)
 


Posts: 551 | Posted: 07:39 AM on September 25, 2009 | IP
anti-evolutionist

|       |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

why can't death brought about by sin be spiritual only? Why does it have to include physical death?

I agree with this.
a life without meaning is as good as death (in my opinion)





-------
due to a lifestyle change I am not posting as often, but I still like to read posts when I can.
my apologies to anyone you who asks me questions that don't get answered.
 


Posts: 111 | Posted: 08:12 AM on September 25, 2009 | IP
Lester10

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

why can't death brought about by sin be spiritual only?


There is nothing to indicate that it was only spiritual. It seems that life was not meant to end at all. It was the Garden of Eden, everything was perfect -why would death of any kind be a part of perfection?
They lived a long time in those days after death came into the world but all men die now and it appears to have started then and gotten worse especially after the flood.

Why say it was only spiritual death - do you think physical death was part of God's perfect plan?


-------
Richard Lewontin: “We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism... no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door”
 


Posts: 1554 | Posted: 04:07 AM on September 26, 2009 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Lester10 at 04:07 AM on September 26, 2009 :
why can't death brought about by sin be spiritual only?


There is nothing to indicate that it was only spiritual.


Only the text of the Bible itself, did Adam die the day he ate the fruit?  It says in Gen 2:17: “in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die.”



-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 08:25 AM on September 26, 2009 | IP
AFJ

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Fencer27 at 07:39 AM on September 25, 2009 :

First there was myth, then came religion, and finally science. The three coincide with one another, as God himself revealed to us His nature through the trinity, so have we the three ways of knowledge.
(Edited by Fencer27 9/25/2009 at 07:40 AM).

Hi fencer,

I suppose you are inferring here that science and evolution are synonymous and that creationism and religion are synonymous.  Therefore since science is empirical and religion is technically philosophical then we go with science.  Sounds great on the surface.

1) Evolution is philosophical.  How can evolution work without

a)naturalism--Only natural causes explain all things.

b)physicalism--Only the physical universe exist (why is science talking about string theory then???) and

c) materialism--Only matter exist.

No one can prove these things to be true.  We only have our senses and the aids of modern equipment to detect physical "reality."


2)Science involves people, and people have different philosophical foundations.  

a)Some people in science are naturalists, so all things are explained by naturalistic criteria  (atheistic evolutionists).  

b)Some people (creationists)in science have faith, so there is usually a dual explanation system.  By dual I mean a professional one--standard geology and evolution knowledge, and a personal model--creation.

c) Some people believe you can blend explanations (theistic evolutionists).  

d)Then there is ID which allows possibility for design by empirical means--but is professionally silent on the implied designer.  

3)  There is no way to prove a "myth" or legend does not have basis  in fact.  Because something is wrongly accounted for, does not preclude facts.

a)The strength for this argument is numerous accounts that agree on certain points.  

b) Changing of details is indicative of passed time and predictive in eyewitness accounts.

*)If someone A saw one aspect of a split second car accident, and someone B saw another aspect, that does not prove that A is wrong or B is wrong or both are wrong.  It means they didn't see the whole picture--but they were there.  In the same way the people of the past could have seen things for which they gave wrong explanations or changed details.

I am thinking in particular of the many dragon legends and flood myths found in ancient writings and archaeological finds.









(Edited by AFJ 9/26/2009 at 10:41 AM).
 


Posts: 86 | Posted: 10:19 AM on September 26, 2009 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from AFJ at 10:19 AM on September 26, 2009 :

*)If someone A saw one aspect of a split second car accident, and someone B saw another aspect, that does not prove that A is wrong or B is wrong or both are wrong.  It means they didn't see the whole picture--but they were there.  In the same way the people of the past could have seen things for which they gave wrong explanations or changed details.


Which is why in court, eyewitness accounts have much less weight than physical forensic evidence.
"He said, she said"



-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 12:06 PM on September 26, 2009 | IP
Fencer27

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from AFJ at 10:19 AM on September 26, 2009 :
I suppose you are inferring here that science and evolution are synonymous and that creationism and religion are synonymous.


Not at all, myth means myth, religion means religion, and science means science. While evolution is part of science, and creationism is part of religion, they are not synonymous with each other here.

1) Evolution is philosophical.  How can evolution work without

a)naturalism--Only natural causes explain all things.


Science only explains the natural, it doesn't comment on the supernatural. Not even in passing say if it exists or not.

b)physicalism--Only the physical universe exist (why is science talking about string theory then???)


First define "physical universe", and read my statement above.

c) materialism--Only matter exist.


I assume matter is also energy in this case. And again, science doesn't comment on this issue.

No one can prove these things to be true.  We only have our senses and the aids of modern equipment to detect physical "reality."


Science doesn't pretend to prove these things are true or untrue.

2)Science involves people, and people have different philosophical foundations...


I agree, and science doesn't say that this universe is purely natural, or that the supernatural exists.

3)  There is no way to prove a "myth" or legend does not have basis  in fact.  Because something is wrongly accounted for, does not preclude facts.


Than you wouldn't mind if I assert that in the beginning was Chaos and Chaos split apart into several entities and these entities split accordingly to create the world around us. I shall further assert that you cannot prove that this has no basis in the facts of reality.

a)The strength for this argument is numerous accounts that agree on certain points.  

b) Changing of details is indicative of passed time and predictive in eyewitness accounts.


So, should we throw out scientific knowledge on the basis of myth?

*)If someone A saw one aspect of a split second car accident, and someone B saw another aspect, that does not prove that A is wrong or B is wrong or both are wrong.  It means they didn't see the whole picture--but they were there.  In the same way the people of the past could have seen things for which they gave wrong explanations or changed details.


So if I told you that Christianity only sees a part of reality and Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Judaism, various Pagan religions, and a myriad of other ancient religions around the world also have the correct information you would agree with that statement?

I am thinking in particular of the many dragon legends and flood myths found in ancient writings and archaeological finds.


So you think dragons are real? And what about civilizations that don't have a flood story dating back 4,000 years ago? Did they just not realize that they were underwater?


-------
"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." - Jesus (Matthew 7:12)
 


Posts: 551 | Posted: 12:23 PM on September 26, 2009 | IP
Fencer27

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Lester10 at 04:07 AM on September 26, 2009 :
There is nothing to indicate that it was only spiritual.


Gen. 2:17 as Apoapsis quoted. They didn't die physically on the same day when they ate the apple.

It seems that life was not meant to end at all. It was the Garden of Eden, everything was perfect -why would death of any kind be a part of perfection?


Isaiah 55:9 "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts."

Just because you view the perfect world as without physical death doesn't mean that God does.

They lived a long time in those days after death came into the world but all men die now and it appears to have started then and gotten worse especially after the flood.


So do you think long living is a sign of holiness?

Why say it was only spiritual death - do you think physical death was part of God's perfect plan?


Because to say that it is physical death doesn't make any sense to me.


-------
"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." - Jesus (Matthew 7:12)
 


Posts: 551 | Posted: 12:39 PM on September 26, 2009 | IP
AFJ

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Fencer, so is Genesis a myth or religion?  or both?  I ask this because you are a theistic evolutionist and a believer in Christ correct?

If Genesis is a myth or religious symbolism, what is the origin of Israel? The Jews?  Abraham the patriarch and father of the Jews is then just a story.

But Jesus taught that Abraham was real.
11 And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.  Matthew 8:11

26 But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’ ?  27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. Mark 12:26

16 So ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has bound—think of it—for eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath?” Luke 13:16

Stephen, the first Christian martyr, in preaching before he was stoned...

So Jacob went down to Egypt; and he died, he and our fathers.  16 And they were carried back to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham bought for a sum of money from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem. Acts 7:16
Jacob was Abraham's grandson.  Stephen believed him to be real.

The apostle Paul mentions Abraham 9 times in Romans.  Once in 2 Corinthians.  Nine times in the short epistle of Galatians.

The author of Hebrews mentions Abraham 10 times.

James, the brother of Jesus, mentions Abraham twice in his book.  And the apostle Peter mentions him once in 1 Peter 3:6.

These are all New Testament passages.  I am interested as how you would explain-- if Genesis is an allegory or myth--why would all these founders of the church believe that Abraham existed--and that the promises made to him were from God and valid forever.

(Edited by AFJ 9/26/2009 at 3:30 PM).
 


Posts: 86 | Posted: 3:27 PM on September 26, 2009 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.