Re: [asa] AIG's weakly message

From: Merv <>
Date: Sun Feb 11 2007 - 17:57:01 EST

Thanks for this corrective, but question of tradition aside, I'm curious
if and how this would have been an issue for various church leaders in
history. You say most rejected it, and you mentioned a couple. So who
were the few (pre-YEC) leaders who embraced 'no death before the fall'
views? Did they catch flack for it from everybody else? Or is it fair
to say that, beyond theological curiosity, it just wasn't an important
issue until science came into its own?

Also I still hope for insights on what a 'transformed' body is and has
been taken to mean.


Michael Roberts wrote:
> ]-->
> According to traditional "no death before the fall" readings of
> the Bible, were Adam and Eve's bodies (before the fall) still in
> an imperishable state understood to be identical to what
> Christians look forward to?
> There is no unanimity of death before the fall from 0 to 1800
> when it was rejected by most. Basil of Caesarea and Aquinas did
> not accept it for starters.
> I am "traditional" because I do not accept death before the fall
> Michael

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Feb 11 17:52:18 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 11 2007 - 17:52:18 EST