RE: [asa] "Evolutionary Creation" book comments (theology on the origin of sin)

From: Dehler, Bernie <>
Date: Wed Sep 30 2009 - 11:27:59 EDT

Hi Denis-

Can I tell you why I think it is unreasonable to believe that sin entered the world through humans? Then you can tell me why I'm wrong. Are you open to investigate this?

Since I'm racing ahead of you, maybe you can pin-point the place where I take a wrong turn? By racing ahead of you, I mean that I agree with all you write, but I'm taking it even further.


-----Original Message-----
From: Denis O. Lamoureux []
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 1:39 PM
To: Dehler, Bernie; asa
Subject: Re: [asa] "Evolutionary Creation" book comments (was: RE: (fall-away) TE and apologetics)

Bernie writes:
> 3. You imply, therefore, that the theology of the Bible is not, and can't
> be, 'ancient and incidental' in the same exact way as applies to science
> and history. I disagree, and say the origin of sin is one such example of
> ancient theology.

Goodness gracious! I IMPLY?!? I refer to Scripture being
inerrant/infallible once every 2.5 pages in my book!
How many times do I need to repeat this?

Bernie, you are now wasting my time. Re-read my posts. I've answered your
questions, but because you (want to?) continue to be entrenched in
CONFLATIONS you are repeatedly missing the point. My suggestion is start
from the beginning, the astronomy in Scripture, build your hermeneutic
there, and then go to Adam.

It is in now clear to me that this is no longer an academic exchange, but
spiritual forces are clouding the discussion.

Over and out,

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Sep 30 11:28:34 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 30 2009 - 11:28:34 EDT