Critical appraisal: The Origin of Mortality: Difference between revisions
m (→Go-ahead) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
|Description:||On the basis of Romans 5:12,17-19 it is said that there was no mortality or death in the world before they commenced with Adam, about seven thousand years ago, and that if humans or other creatures existed before Adam, they must have been immortal or "something else". On the other hand there is scientific evidence that living things have been dying for millions of years. Can these be reconciled? | |Description:||On the basis of Romans 5:12,17-19 it is said that there was no mortality or death in the world before they commenced with Adam, about seven thousand years ago, and that if humans or other creatures existed before Adam, they must have been immortal or "something else". On the other hand there is scientific evidence that living things have been dying for millions of years. Can these be reconciled? | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Comment by proposer:||This is based on the review of a video by | |Comment by proposer:||This is based on the review of a video by {{RonC}} that was forwarded to me by Daphne. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYQMY6TwXVM&list=PLapIoMHXBxJ9icjxg885kQnvMro-toPZW | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} |
Latest revision as of 16:01, 14 September 2019
Problem, Question, or Reconciliation Challenge
Suggested New Topic Short title: The Origin of Mortality Proposed by: Paul P, Q or RC? Reconciliation Challenge Description: On the basis of Romans 5:12,17-19 it is said that there was no mortality or death in the world before they commenced with Adam, about seven thousand years ago, and that if humans or other creatures existed before Adam, they must have been immortal or "something else". On the other hand there is scientific evidence that living things have been dying for millions of years. Can these be reconciled? Comment by proposer: This is based on the review of a video by Ron Cowie that was forwarded to me by Daphne. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYQMY6TwXVM&list=PLapIoMHXBxJ9icjxg885kQnvMro-toPZW
Criteria for Critical Appraisal
for all questions and definitions of "problems reconciling our various understandings of Scripture with the discoveries of science"
Clear Aims
Its aims are clear: terms used are clearly defined, especially if they are new or can be used in different ways.
Unbiased
It is unbiased, not presupposing any viewpoint or answer.
Respectful
It is respectful: not insulting, provocative or slanderous. If a question, it is a genuine question seeking an answer; if a problem, it is a genuine problem seeking a solution.
Focused
It has a clear focus, neither too broad nor too narrow, has a small number of relevant quotes and is free of equivocation.
Feasible
It appears able to be researched and at least partial conclusions reached beyond reasonable doubt.
Relevant
It is relevant to the task in hand, and can't be rewritten to be more directly relevant.
Important
Answers to it and the process of seeking them will be informative and useful.
Go-ahead
Going ahead at The Origin of Mortality PQRC 7