hezekiah jones

Are you sure you're not a Christian? Because you'd make a great Fundie.

AJ113

Nope, you clearly stated that crack babies were examples of original sin. Remember?

Mageth

The point is that, through the selfishness of their parents, these babies have a weakness for crack.

Nope, they have a physical addiction to crack, not a "weakness for crack." Note that the babies have no idea what's making them hurt, no idea what their bodies crave, and don't know crack from crackers.

Likewise, through Adam's selfishness, his offspring have a weakness for sin.

As pointed out, you weren't making an analogy; you were saying crack babies were examples of original sin.

yguy

Sure. Where is the contradiction?

yguy

The substantive difference being...?

And how is this significant?

"Original sin" is something of a misnomer, since Adam never made any of his progeny sin; but his original sin produced a weakness in his offspring which predisposed them to make the same mistake he did.

Calzaer

yguy: As the resident Elementary Education major, I'll tell you what the problem with that is. Follow me closely.

Take topic X. For this example, topic X = hurricanes.

An EXAMPLE is related to X in that it is either identical to X or a subset thereof. "Hurricane Andrew is an example of a famous hurricane."

A COMPARISON is not directly related, but contains parallels to X. "Tornados involve a rotation of a lage air mass, like hurricanes." Note, however, that a tornado is not an EXAMPLE of a hurricane. This differs from an ANALOGY in that the parallels are based on concrete concepts rather than abstract ones.

An ANALOGY is only related to X through translation of key similarities. It's about halfway between a COMPARISON and an ALLEGORY. It's a more complex version of a SIMILE. "A daycare center can be as chaotic and dangerous as a hurricane."

Your "crack baby" statement was not an EXAMPLE, in that it is not identical to the topic of Original Sin, nor is it an event contained within a subset of Original Sin. I would call it a COMPARISON, based on the concreteness of the parallel, but others could just as accurately call it an ANALOGY based on the nebulous concept of the original topic you're attempting to find parallels to. In neither case is it an EXAMPLE unless you mean to say that crack babies are a direct result of Original Sin (which you deny in your penultimate post).

Calzaer

Are you attempting to say that humans have a physical addiction to sin? If so, you effectively deny the existence of Free Will based on the pathology of physical addiction and the withdrawl symptoms thereof.

Farren

I've converted. Calzaer is indeed god.

nice explanation of terms there.

yguy

Produce the quote, please.

yguy

No, I'm saying we are predisposed to it. The addiction comes when, having reached the age of accountability, we repeat Adam's mistake.