fstdt: For instance, we could imagine that planets have come into existence at all different points of time across the timeline of the universe, and that each of those civilizations has existed for only a finite amount of time in the infinitely existing universe; that would certainly explain the existing sin in the infinite universe. In this way, an infinitely existing universe is consistent with civilizations that have only existed for a finite amount of time.
My response: you totally missed the point. The point is that anything that is created from an infinity of the past would have approximated to infinity itself, therefore anything would have had an infinity to be perfected without sin. This is what calculus teaches, that anything approximating infinity is deemed itself infinity. You're slow eh? Anyway, you can see I can do this with everyone of your comments, but should I? If you have been wrong more than 100 times in a row, should I correct your thousands of mistakes too? Humility says you are wrong and would prefer to go to hell. Should I cast what is holy unto dogs? Probably not, for the Bible says not to. By the way, the Bible does say if you search God with all your heart, yes, you will find him.
"And ye shall seek me, and find [me], when ye shall search for me with all your heart" (Jer. 29.13).Since you are still unsaved, it is because you have not searched him with all your heart, but hold back for yourself your selfish desires to keep yourself independent from him.
fstdt: We could also imagine a universe which has recurring Bangs and Crunches, which cycle for eternity. So that, the reason why sin still exists is because no civilization has ever had a chance to evolve for an infinite period of time; each Bang and Crunch causes everything in the universe to start all over again.
My response: This recycling process, if it exists is also bound by the same law of eternity of the past of cause and effects, such that you would have had an eternity to be perfected, so therefore, it is not possible there is an eternity of recyclings. And to assume recycling is just assuming it for its own sake without evidence; quite unlike the evidence that exists for the fact that we have seen an exponential progression in the conscience of the saved these past 6000 years so it will not take much longer to reach sinlessness in the saved. Do not take such a small sample of a few generations, for that would be disingenuous. If sin is going to percolate down to 10 generations, then this time must pass before further progress is made.
fstdt: Finally, we can say that the presumption that humans evolve into a "sinless" state is unfounded. Obviously, if Brooks believes in things such as original sin, then he cannot believe by definition that humans could evolve into a sinless state; he can say that we may come closer and closer to a sinless state, but never achieve it no matter if they’ve existed for eternity or not.
My response: Where did I say humans evolved into a sinless state? I know of no such thing, since it has not happened yet. But those who are saved are being perfected to sinlessness and not by evolution, for evolution is the physical development since the amoeba and itself has no explanation of what came before the first celled creature. It is merely the body from "dust" (Gen 2.7). And we are also more than physical, we are also soulical and spiritual; that is we have a mind, will and emotion that is unique in creation and an intuition, conscience and communion with our creator that is also unique. Based on the exponential progression of our conscience these past 6000 years seeing the improvement towards perfection is not presumed, but this constitutes a proof. What proof do you have to suggest otherwise? Amen.