Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Because Paul says in Romans 5 that death due to sin passed onto all mankind, because all mankind are sinners.
How else to transfer this Sin Nature, but by DNA?
If you can think of another way, by all means, I'm listening.Because God demands a spotless sacrifice.
A sinner taking the sins of other sinners upon himself is just wrong.
Peter says Jesus' blood was 'precious':What makes something "precious"?
It's rarity, it's composition, it's owner, it's uniqueness, it's efficacy --- to name a few.
Woah, something just hit me.
If scientists could identify the genome sequence which contained sin, then systematically remove it before in vitro fertilization, we could essentially create sinless humans.
__________________ "We can easily forgive a child that is afraid of the dark, the real tragedy is when people are afraid of the light"
-Plato
Woah, something just hit me.
If scientists could identify the genome sequence which contained sin, then systematically remove it before in vitro fertilization, we could essentially create sinless humans.
Not if it's spiritual in nature.
If it is spiritual in nature, you would have to first build a machine capable of doing this:
Originally Posted by 2 Kings 6:17
And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.
And that's just to find it.
And even then, your instruments would just pass right through it.
1- if it's spiritual in nature then it doesn't need to be passed through genetics.
2- OOOOkay, I finally got what you're getting at with that verse, sorry I was so slow on the uptake.
I can only assume that god opened the young mans eyes by permitting his eyes to pick up some other particle that we have yet to discover, one that bounces off spiritual beings so that it can be picked up by the eye and interpreted as a shape. Or actually more likely (especially since he thought they were on fire) the spirits are radiating this particle themselves.
So in order to find spirits, we would have to identify the invisible spirit radiation that they emit. Detecting particles is easy, the problem is, detecting which particles and knowing where to look. Technically speaking, scientists are perfectly capable of building a machine that see's angels, they just don't have the specific information required to do it without years and years of painstaking experimentation which could fail because (a) they happen to be in the wrong spot, or (b) they happen to be looking for the wrong type of radiation.
A lot of time that could be better spent doing other things because the likelihood of angels actually existing is small enough not to warrant it an investigation.
[edit] brain-fart. Humans (naturally possessing souls since it's 2:30 am and I'm just humoring myself) would emit this same radiation. Think AV, what radiation do humans produce? This could be the breakthrough we've been looking for. Then we can find these angels and start experimenting to see what (if any) materials do affect them so we can klonk one out and dissect it for your taxonomy question.
[double edit] I'm going to bed now. I have to go to class some time tomorrow.
__________________ "We can easily forgive a child that is afraid of the dark, the real tragedy is when people are afraid of the light"
-Plato
Last edited by Wedjat; 2nd November 2009 at 09:49 AM.
Then we can find these angels and start experimenting to see what (if any) materials do affect them so we can klonk one out and dissect it for your taxonomy question.
As I just told someone about an hour ago, he would twist your clipboard into a Christmas tree ornament too.
Because Paul says in Romans 5 that death due to sin passed onto all mankind, because all mankind are sinners.
How else to transfer this Sin Nature, but by DNA?
If you can think of another way, by all means, I'm listening.
Well, you suggested it:
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
Not if it's spiritual in nature.
Makes a lot more sense than pseudo-genetics (in fact I'm not even sure how in one post you can say it's genetic and then in the next claim it's spiritual, but w/e), but even conceptually I'd disagree with it. Sin is about choice, not some hereditary condemnation. I view original sin as taking passages about all humans' tendency to sin a tad too far.
Because God demands a spotless sacrifice.
A sinner taking the sins of other sinners upon himself is just wrong.
Except this is where the flaws in defining a sin nature, human=sinner etc. come out. Jesus wasn't a sinner, because he didn't sin. Simple as.
Why would you describe what Jesus went through in the desert as "temptation" if there was physically no way he could make the wrong choice because he didn't have the sin nature? It makes the whole thing utterly meaningless.
It also makes the whole persona of Jesus as a model Christian utterly meaningless - He dealt with the exact same temptation as us and dealt with it in the way we're supposed to, by calling on God, reading the Word, and seeking the help of the Holy Spirit, and he also had the risk of sinning. What does that mean if he had some inbuilt genetic get-out clause? The paradigm is baseless. That's not even close to being fully human, we have it much harder than that.
Peter says Jesus' blood was 'precious':What makes something "precious"?
It's rarity, it's composition, it's owner, it's uniqueness, it's efficacy --- to name a few.
Ok. Nothing there about having or not having a sin gene, I see.
Again, this is only a problem if you make the assumption that human=sinner.
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
And how many animals had to die, and will die in the future, so we can have a good day, thanks to evolution?
Yeah, two can play at that game.
How many animals had to die in atonement sacrifices before God finally got it right?
__________________ ____________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by Cabal; 2nd November 2009 at 10:14 AM.
It also makes the whole persona of Jesus as a model Christian utterly meaningless - He dealt with the exact same temptation as us and dealt with it in the way we're supposed to, by calling on God, reading the Word, and seeking the help of the Holy Spirit, and he also had the risk of sinning.
Jesus, like Adam, was sinless at the time He was tempted; but unlike Adam, did not give in to that temptation.
Jesus shows us what Adam and Eve should have done.
How can sin be passed in DNA if it is spiritual in nature?
__________________ Slug's 1st Law of YECism- Genesis 1-9 must be interpreted literally. Slug's 2nd Law of YECism- Any other verses can be interpreted liberally to support the 1st Law. Slug's 3rd Law of YECism- Make up any extra-Biblical claim, no matter how wild, to wave-away evidence in violation of the 1st Law.
"If God sent a wind from space, and blew waters off the surface, for example, the waters would go down. Just as if you take a cup full of water over a sink, and blow hard on it, a lot will go out of the cup. Elementary." -dad ^This statement nullifies his own argument by comparing a "present state" event to a "past state" event!
Linear Mode
