C.S. Lewis said that paradisal man could be like a brute that when we knew
him we would fall to his feet a worship him. I do agree with that view. In
fact, the movie "Being There" reminded me of that description of unfallen
man and I was not surprised with the ending of the movie where Peter Sellers
actually walks on water! But all this is a particular interpretation of
Scripture. We really do not know but certainly the Fall does indicate a
drastic change in kind and not merely a change in degree. We really do not
know man before the Fall. Was he able to subsist without eating, sleeping,
and so on? My reading of Scripture is that man before the Fall was superior
in intellect and closer to God that present day man.
From: Glenn R. Morton <email@example.com>
To: Moorad Alexanian <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Sunday, May 30, 1999 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: The origin of scientific thinking
>Moorad Alexanian wrote:
>> I have not followed the details of the origin of intelligence discussion,
>> but isn't the major difference between Scripture and evolutionary theory
>> that whereas in the former there may be a degradation of human behavior
>> perhaps, intellect while in the latter it is totally the opposite? It
>> to me that Scripture makes it clear that man was in the very presence of
>> and was able to communicate with Him. If true, we have come a long way
>> that situation to the present one where now man wonders why God is hiding
>> behind the creation so silently.
>What Scripture is clear about is that God created Adam and Eve special.
>Concerning the rest I would suggest that you are reading into the
>Scripture what isn't there. Scripture makes absolutely no statement
>whatsoever about the intelligence of Adam and Eve (were they Einsteins,
>common folk or even mentally inferior to us). It makes no statement
>about their language ability level (did they speak on a 5 year old
>levele an 8 year old level a 30 year old level?) And the Bible never
>makes a statement about the degradation of human intellect although the
>fall certainly affected our behavior.
>Concerning the intelligence, all that was required for moral
>accountability was an ability to understand consequences. Two weeks
>ago I attended the funeral of my wife's 66-year-old severely mentally
>retarded uncle. Ernie operated on a 3-4 year old level. He loved the
>Lord, prayed daily, served in his church, asked forgiveness when he
>sinned etc. In short, Ernie had all the intelligence necessary for
>moral accountability. So, one can't use this as a criterion to crank the
>intellectual level of Adam and Eve up to Einstein's level.
>Concerning language ability. The bible makes no statement about how
>much language was requrired. Modern primitive peoples have about 5000
>words in their languages. THat is all. The primitive languages have
>fewer nouns. (Michael C. Corballis, The Lopsided Ape, (New York: Oxford
>University Press, 1991), p. 153-154) Modern English dictionaries have
>on average around 63,000 words. I have an unabridged dictionary which
>has 2128 pages each with 3 columns and each column contains an average
>of 32 words. This works out to around 200,000 words. At what point in
>this language skill does a person become human?
>Because of these considerations I do not believe it is at all within the
>Scriptural confines to require an initial high level of intellectual
>ability followed by a decline. Adam may very well have been less than we
>are intellectually, but before the fall he was our moral superior;
>afterwards he was our moral equal.
>Foundation, Fall and Flood
>Adam, Apes and Anthropology