Open Theism Discussion Board
  HomeLog InRegisterSearch the ForumHelp
   
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
 		Forum Quick Jump
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Similitude
Registered Member


Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
  		   Posted 12/16/2006 1:56 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Is there any philosophical or scriptural basis to guess what the world would have been like apart from a Fall? E.g., had the first sin been committed by a 10th generation human, would a Fall have resulted from that? Or would that person have died while the rest of the world proceeded on to some intended fulness, without a Fall? I've always thought that scripture indicates that the Fall was necessary because the only two existing humans sinned--I guess because God seemed to plan for the possibility of sin in the first place. But I'm wondering, now, if we can legitimately conclude that a Fall would have resulted for all humanity no matter when or how a sin happened.

 

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
  		   Posted 12/16/2006 4:22 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Or, *maybe* no sin would have resulted in a maturing of Adam and Eve, and no need for either death or sexual reporduction. Who knows?

(o)

Back to Top
 

Similitude
Registered Member


Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
  		   Posted 12/16/2006 4:55 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
According to the account, God told them to fill up the earth. Wouldn't that imply reproduction? How does EO view that account?

 

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
  		   Posted 12/16/2006 5:14 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
The EO view is that this this as being BEYOND what can be known. (Its NOT dogma.) There are opions, but the ALL--together--agree that this is unknowable. But as to speculation, Maximus figured that they didn't have a chance -- they could have resisted, but didn't have the maturity and strength. Again, that is speculation pointedly without concidering it to be the end-all!

And you are right about the impossible knots to untie in this.

As to fill the earth, that can mean a lot of things -- in my own opinion. But even so it is written AFTER the fact, and in that can mean lots of things too. (No CNN reporting with videotape at nine.)

Does this matter to you? The subject of this thread, I mean.

If so, can you share why it matters, and for what?

- B

(o)

Back to Top
 

Similitude
Registered Member


Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
  		   Posted 12/16/2006 7:03 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Yes, B., it does matter to me. If the Christus Victor model is correct (as I tend to think it is), then God's original purpose (not His ideal will, of course) is, in some sense, being fulfilled despite the Fall. It's just being accomplished in a different way. If this is the case, then it matters I think, whether death would have been possible in an unfallen world. Especially does this seem to be the case if universalism is true. Because if:
 
1) Universalism is true, AND
 
2) Sin/death could have occurred without necessarily resulting in a "Fall,"
 
then it would seem to imply that some original purpose could be fulfilled independent of UR.  IOW, UR would not be the only end of creation (if it was truly an original end at all). Does this make sense? I'm just trying to follow out the logical implications of what the Fall means if UR is also true. If UR is not true, it's somewhat less significant. 
 
Regardless, the Christus Victor model does render my question significant since, according to that perspective, the original purpose seems to be attainable even with a Fall. Am I misunderstanding the meaning of Christus Victor? Doesn't it mean that an original purpose is yet attainable because of Christ's suffering/death?
 
But I don't see how positing reproduction as the meaning of filling up the earth is even speculative. I can't even imagine what else it could have meant. Nor do I see what difference it makes that it was written AFTER the fact. The gospels were written after the fact too.

 

Post Edited (jefscott) : 12/16/2006 9:11:50 PM (GMT-6)

Back to Top
 

PotOnWheel
Registered Member




Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
  		   Posted 12/17/2006 5:33 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
CLICK:
 
 

 

Rightclick with "Save Target As."

(o)

Back to Top
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
   
Forum Information
Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:33 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual