Can you describe this point? It seems to me he is confusing the logical necessity of there being an Adam & Eve for Augustine to have built his doctrine …
… with a completely different circumstance that Joshua finds himself in.
I think John cannot let go of the prospect of “proving me wrong” … so the sidelines has no real appeal, and he perseverates.
But maybe if you describe John’s point with your usual clarity, we can all suddenly realize I am sooo wrong?
John seems to be concerned with the marketing problem – what is needed for selling GA to YECs.
I must confess I am concerned with it too. I look forward to the day when there are another dozen Trinitarian Christians endorsing the whole set of Genealogical Adam scenarios!
Some folks find it odd that a UU would be zealously promoting G.A. Others try to turn it into something offensive.
But to me, the importance is that with G.A., I no longer have to argue over Original Sin (which I reject completely). If the target audience LOVES Original Sin doctrine to make sense of the world, I am happy to show him or her that G.A. helps with that process.
G.A. isn’t for all Creationist types… but it works well for at least some of them.
“Blessed are the cheesemakers.” I believe that’s actually from the sermon on the mount.
Try not to get so excited. All the shouting makes it hard to understand you.
As I explaining elsewhere… let’s look to SCD’s special form of oppositionalism that has me so jazzed up the last few days…
In the meantime, think dairy!
