- Culture & society (59)
- History (25)
- Notable Quotes (13)
- Personal story (11)
- Politics (23)
- Science and faith (77)
- Uncategorized (15)
- November 30, 2008: Of Baramins and Baloney 5
- November 23, 2008: Of Baramins and Baloney 4
- November 10, 2008: Of Baramins and Baloney 3
- November 2, 2008: Good conversation
- October 19, 2008: Baraminology and pseudoscience
- October 5, 2008: No Matter What
- September 16, 2008: As easy as 1-2-3
- September 7, 2008: Not what they had in mind
- August 31, 2008: The momentum against logic and facts
- August 24, 2008: Orgnizations v. Organisms
Blogroll
Chat
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
Apples & fig leaves
Ask any Christian what Adam and Eve ate that caused mankind to fall, and they will probably say an apple. Ask the same person how Adam and Eve tried to cover themselves, and you will be told with fig leaves. Everyone associates the two items with Adam and Eve, but they are not named in the Bible. Recently I discovered both mentioned (only one time each) in Paradise Lost first published in 1667. It is a beautiful epic poem, full of good logic and thought, and the parts where Scripture is exact, Milton did not contradict. It is good historical fiction, even good science fiction, but it’s still fiction. What I find interesting is that such fictional ideas come to us hundreds of years later, and we don’t even know from where they come. No one asks; the ideas are just accepted without going to the source. I see no harm in this example, and maybe they WERE apples and fig leaves, but there can be harm in attributing to either Scripture or science that which is someone’s speculations, not actually there in the source. Historically, any differences between Scripture and science have been based on one group or both buying into some assumptions handed down until they became as sacred as the real source. Examples include spontaneous generation, the underground water cycle , and an earth-centered universe. I believe it is true today concerning the theory of evolution. More people need to be looking at the facts from both sources.