RE: [asa] No Adam?

From: Dehler, Bernie <>
Date: Wed May 06 2009 - 12:58:33 EDT

But it is something easy to relate to, for most of us likely...

-----Original Message-----
From: John Burgeson (ASA member) []
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 6:59 AM
To: Dehler, Bernie
Cc: asa
Subject: Re: [asa] No Adam?

Hey Bernie -- it's MY memory, not yours! Cut me some slack here! <G>

On 5/5/09, Dehler, Bernie <> wrote:
> You also couldn't have read "FORD" (and then others) without lots of prep
> work too, such as singing the "ABC's" to learn the alphabet... what sounds
> letters make, etc. Some words are sight-read, others sounded-out. So it
> wasn't a binary on/off to read/can't-read. Yes- a sudden awareness of
> something, but it was just a glimpse of what reading would become for you.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On
> Behalf Of John Burgeson (ASA member)
> Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 6:53 AM
> To: Merv Bitikofer
> Cc: asa
> Subject: Re: [asa] No Adam?
> A fair analysis. I had no intention of suggesting that my experience
> was normative. It is just one of my memories from about 75 years ago.
> I'm sure I read "better" now than then -- but not with greater sense
> of accomplishment!
> j
> On 5/5/09, Merv Bitikofer <> wrote:
>> John Burgeson (ASA member) wrote:
>>> On 5/2/09, Merv Bitikofer <> wrote:
>>> "But it would be impossible and useless for us to identify the day and
>>> hour that this "switch" happened and we became literate."
>>> It might be "useless," but I can clearly remember that day and hour.
>>> It was late evening; I was riding in the back seat as my parents drove
>>> home. We passed the Ford dealer and I spelled out the sign -- F O R D
>>> -- and ask dad what it said. When he told me it was like a veil being
>>> lifted! Letters spelled out real words, and I could decode them! I
>>> made a real pest of myself on the rest of the way home! I could read!
>>> I have never quit!
>>> Burgy
>> Yes, but I pretty strongly suggest that you weren't reading at the level
>> you are now on that very next day! Nevertheless, your reply illustrates
>> something at play here: our propensity or need to "nail things down"
>> and commemorate those important milestones as it were. Think how
>> important it is to some Christians to be able to recite day and hour
>> when they became saved. They resist or set aside the notion that there
>> may have been any progression or process involved because they/we all
>> are more comfortable functioning as binary thinkers. We celebrate a
>> birth"day" even though we were quite alive the day before and
>> incrementally progressing there for around nine months before that. But
>> a trip down the birth canal is a significant event and as good as any to
>> choose for documentation purposes. But my point is that these are
>> conveniences for the sake of our own thought processes about the world
>> and not necessarily accurate reflections of reality. We want to think
>> of "one" Adam and "one" fall event that neatly happened at one time
>> because that is easier to process, relate theological truths about,
>> etc. I think it a valid form of accommodation. Hence the wrestlings of
>> others here over "just who was the first" to be this or do that. They
>> may be missing the point that the historical accommodation shouldn't be
>> the focus of the theology --particularly not after it is recognized as
>> accommodation. This only gives others unnecessary grounds for
>> dismissing it.
>> --Merv
> --
> Burgy
> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed May 6 12:59:32 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed May 06 2009 - 12:59:32 EDT