Fundamentalism and Intellectualism

LifeToTheFullest! · #**111** 2nd July 2009, 07:46 PM

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

Well, I actually spoke too fast on that.

My mouth was engaged before my brain was.

If there were no lions present prior to the Fall, then my point stands: no carnivores before the Fall.

If there were lions present prior to the Fall, they were not carnivores: no carnivores before the Fall.

Either way --- no carnivores before the Fall.

According to the Bible, in the Millennial Kingdom and Eternity Future, the lion is going to be a herbivore.

So God will perform a miracle and instantly change their carnivorous teeth to herbivorous teeth? Interestesting.

iremouth · #**112** 2nd July 2009, 07:48 PM

Originally Posted by Hentenza

Why would I cite the fall when discussing animal behavior? The fall technically only affected man not animals.

If the fall only affected man and not the animals did the tigers kill other animals for food before the fall? I suppose they must have done other wise whats the point of having bone crushing teeth and flesh tearing claws?

Originally Posted by Catherineanne

This is not in fact the case. I am no expert by any means, but as I understand it man's fall had a direct effect on nature, and a previously peaceful co-existence among lettuce eating lions, tigers and lambs in the Garden of Eden ended up being corrupted into the nature-red-in-tooth-and-claw that we know and love today.
Therefore the fall did not affect only mankind, but the whole of creation.

So man's fall had a direct effect on nature, the meat eating animals which were previously eating lettuce with their bone crushing teeth and flesh tearing claws are now doing what God had intended them to be doing all along, as if this God had some how known the fall was coming, is that devious or what?

I thought the fall was designed to answer questions not create them.

AV1611VET · #**113** 2nd July 2009, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by LifeToTheFullest!

So God will perform a miracle and instantly change their carnivorous teeth to herbivorous teeth? Interestesting.

Wait 'til you see what He's going to do to the Periodic Table:

Originally Posted by 2 Peter 3:10

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

He is then going to create a New Earth out of them.

Now, if He can do that with the universe, a lion going from carnivorous to herbivorous would be a walk in the park.

plindboe · #**114** 2nd July 2009, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by Hentenza

If you follow the casualty argument then you would know that there can not be an infinite series of causes so there has to be a cause that is uncaused. Some have tried to refute this but have only ended up positing fallacies.

As far as I'm aware the causality argument doesn't show that there can't be an infinite series of causes, it simply assumes it in one of its premises. It also assumes that all finite causes are effects, and can't be their own causes.

All these assumptions are based on thinking that assumes that everything, everywhere, that ever existed, in and beyond our Universe, must abide by the very same rules we see among the macroscopic objects around us in our daily life.

It takes a conviction of personal omniscience to make those assumptions in the first place. How about some humility?

Peter

Hespera · #**115** 2nd July 2009, 08:55 PM

ire sez...So man's fall had a direct effect on nature, the meat eating animals which were previously eating lettuce with their bone crushing teeth and flesh tearing claws are now doing what God had intended them to be doing all along, as if this God had some how known the fall was coming, is that devious or what?

I thought the fall was designed to answer questions not create them.QUOTE///////////

hespera sez...

its worse than that. they have to eat STRAW! Bible sez so. Not even hay. Straw of course is inedible except for bacteria.

AV1611VET · #**116** 2nd July 2009, 09:06 PM

Originally Posted by Hespera

Straw of course is inedible except for bacteria.

You don't get it, do you, Hespera?

Straw, in this dispensation, is inedible, has no nutrients, etc.

Straw, on the New Earth, will be different.

I guarantee you, Hespera, this forum is no place to bring your uniformitarian doctrines.

Of course, that's your prerogative though; feel free to do so --- but we'll do our job too.

gaara4158 · #**117** 3rd July 2009, 07:04 AM

Originally Posted by AV1611VET

You don't get it, do you, Hespera?

Straw, in this dispensation, is inedible, has no nutrients, etc.

Straw, on the New Earth, will be different.

I guarantee you, Hespera, this forum is no place to bring your uniformitarian doctrines.

Of course, that's your prerogative though; feel free to do so --- but we'll do our job too.

Let me guess... the straw will have flesh, bones, and the ability to struggle not to be eaten, so that the bone-crushing teeth and flesh-tearing claws will be completely necessary for a vegetarian.

theFijian · #**118** 3rd July 2009, 07:05 AM

Originally Posted by Hespera

Zero evidence means I dont believe it till I see evidence!

What kind of evidence is admissible?

PS: - best to just ignore AV for sake of not derailing the thread, except i suppose as a kind of live demonstration of the OP.

MoonLancer · #**119** 3rd July 2009, 07:11 AM

Originally Posted by Hentenza

No one here is being intellectually dishonest but merely do not remove the supernatural from the natural.

Would i be intellectually dishonest if i said fey created us from pixie dust and tried to make that stick as a scientific statement?

The supernatural can easily be lumped into a pile called unfalsifiable and the unfalsifiable have NO place in science

*edit* didn't realize this thread was about 12 pages, never mind.

Catherineanne · #**120** 3rd July 2009, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by iremouth

If the fall only affected man and not the animals did the tigers kill other animals for food before the fall? I suppose they must have done other wise whats the point of having bone crushing teeth and flesh tearing claws?

So man's fall had a direct effect on nature, the meat eating animals which were previously eating lettuce with their bone crushing teeth and flesh tearing claws are now doing what God had intended them to be doing all along, as if this God had some how known the fall was coming, is that devious or what?

I thought the fall was designed to answer questions not create them.

Unless you are a fundie of some kind, there is no branch of human knowledge where an answer will not raise another ten questions. Theology is no different.

However, before I dig myself any deeper into the defence of the Fall, I ought to say I regard the story as allegorical, and in no way literal. The idea of a literal Adam and Eve is ludicrous in the extreme, and this is not a minority view; the vast majority of Christians accept it as story or myth or allegory. This forum is slanted in many ways towards a prevalent US theology, which is not actually mainstream. The story of Adam and Eve as a pattern for all mankind is fine. As literal truth, it is a complete non starter.

For one thing, there are two mutually contradictory creation stories in Genesis. Creationists are very keen to accept the Adam and Eve version, but quietly forget the other preceding one, which says that mankind was created in God's image, male and female. No mention of Adam and Eve. That is the creation story I go along with.

However, you are correct. Any lions around in the (allegorical) garden of Eden would not have been carnivorous. I dare say they would have resembled the cuddly toys in my daughter's bedroom; cute smiles, no teeth, no claws.

In essence we have primitive people, looking around them at their frankly dismal existence, and saying, how on earth did it get like this? The story of the Fall is one answer.