Gen 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. 8 The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed.
Dr. Dembski has stated in his book The End of Christianity. Here are just a couple of outlandish statements from his book:
For the theodicy I am proposing to be compatible with evolution, God must not merely introduce existing human-like beings from outside the Garden. In addition, when they enter the Garden, God must transform their consciousness so that they become rational moral agents made in God’s image . . . (The End of Christianity, p. 159)
Any evils humans experience outside the Garden before God breathes into them the breath of life would be experienced as natural evils in the same way that other animals experience them. The pain would be real, but it would not be experienced as divine justice in response to willful rebellion. Moreover, once God breathes the breath of life into them, we may assume that the first humans experienced an amnesia of their former animal life: Operating on a higher plane of consciousness once infused with the breath of life, they would transcend the lower plane of animal consciousness on which they had previously operated—though, after the Fall, they might be tempted to resort to that lower consciousness. (The End of Christianity, p. 154–155)
In this book, Dr. Dembski states that Noah’s Flood was a local event, not worldwide. (Now, some people have claimed Dr. Dembski has changed on this point, but I have seen nothing documenting this.)
He goes on to report:
"Now, radio host Hank Hanegraaff asked Dr. Dembski to be a guest on his Bible Answer Man broadcast every Tuesday for the month of July. He is giving away free copies of Dr. Dembski’s The End of Christianity to anyone who requests it (with a donation of any amount) for the month of July as well. Dr. Dembski’s article “Old Earth Creationism and the Fall” will be featured soon in Hanegraaff’s Christian Research Journal; Hanegraaff is also giving away copies of the article. Hanegraaff endorsed the book when it was published, and he says during the radio show that he “believes in this book.” "
I guess I'm not totally surprised---Hanegraaff has been moving away from biblical truth for a while now. What struck me about this article is that Dembski comes off as a New Ager, talking about a higher level of conscienceness.
"Hath God said?"
Dembski seems like a New Ager with his use of "higher plane of consciousness" and claim that man somehow has hidden memories of a former life as an animal; this seems akin to reincarnation. How in the world he came up with his nightmare of all of this nonsense is beyond me, but its NOT CHRISTIAN, its not even rational. He's lost his marbles up in that high ivory tower they call "academia". Put another way, the man studied himself away from truth. He needs to just proclaim what he already is: not a Christian.
This war is not new, but it was not considered Christian before. Consider this:
Dr. Joseph Priestley, the great champion of Socinianism among NonconformistsHe says:—"In my time the academy was in a state peculiarly favorable to the serious pursuit of truth, as the students were about equally divided upon every question of much importance, such as liberty, necessity, the sleep of the soul, and all the articles of theological orthodoxy and heresy; in consequence of which, all these topics were the subject of continual discussion. Our tutors, also, were of different opinions, Dr. Ashworth taking the orthodox side of every question, and Mr. Clark, the sub-tutor, that of heresy, though always with the greatest modesty. Both of our tutors being young, at least as tutors, and some of the senior students excelling more than they could pretend to do in several branches of study, they indulged us in the greatest freedoms. The general plan of our studies, which may be seen in Dr. Doddridge's published lectures, was exceedingly favorable to free enquiry, as we were referred to authors on both sides of every question. In this situation I saw reason to embrace what is generally called the heterodox side of every question."