Do you think that the story of Adam and Eve literally happened?

[ripple the car]

Just curious. I really don't.

Yes, I do. It seems to me as though it is meant to be taken at face value, as something that really happened. And the New Testament references Genesis often, as though talking about things which truly happened.

 

[miamited]

Because no talking snakes and magic fruits have ever been observed by science as far as I'm aware.

Hi again kees,

If I might also point out that no one has ever heard a donkey talk either, but the Scriptures do claim that one did speak to a man. The angelic rank, of which Satan is a part, are not as powerful as God, but they are much more powerful than we are. Therefore, even if the 'serpent' was some creature like a snake, I'm not sure it would be impossible for an angelic being to speak through one.

As far as the fruit, the only fruit that was special was the fruit from the tree of life and the tree of knowledge. Those trees, according to the Scriptures, are no longer among us. So, I would agree that we don't observe any super natural fruit, but then it hasn't been with us for about 6,000 years now, according to the Scriptures, and so we shouldn't expect to see any. All the rest of the fruit claimed to be in the garden was just your ordinary everyday variety of fruit. We see it all the time.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[Peter J Barban]

I believe the story of Adam and Eve is true, as believers have done for thousands of years.

 

[Saint JOHN]

Just curious. I really don't.

God is ! he said it !! that ends the matter... resistance is futile !

 

[-57]

Its unfortunate that some Christians are able and willing to believe literally anything, so long as they feel as though it's true.

Even to the extent that they would reject what is observed to the contrary in physical reality.

Looks like you dodged the point.

 

[MrsFoundit]

So, I would agree that we don't observe any super natural fruit, but then it hasn't been with us for about 6,000 years now, according to the Scriptures, and so we shouldn't expect to see any. All the rest of the fruit claimed to be in the garden was just your ordinary everyday variety of fruit. We see it all the time.

Is there any reason to expect that present day scientific standards applied in Eden ? The act of disobedience we call "the Fall", which caused both death and our exclusion from Eden, seems to me to be were we have a universal physical standard begin.

 

[MrsFoundit]

and willing to believe literally anything, so long as they feel as though it's true.

The Bible is a specific collection of books, not anything. The contents of those books is fixed, not variant on what people feel.

 

[dqhall]

Just curious. I really don't.

God created more than I can imagine. Genesis is not a good witness.

 

[Job 33:6]

The Bible is a specific collection of books, not anything. The contents of those books is fixed, not variant on what people feel.

The contents of the book are fixed, but people's interpretations, as always, are all over the map.

Indeed, people are truly willing to believe anything, so long as they feel it is true.

Even with nothing tangible to support their ideas, they will literally believe anything. Even in the face of contrary physically real evidence.

There are Muslims who believe that their prophet road a flying donkey and that ants could speak to people. Their response? Much similar to your own, that it comes from not any source, but the source of truth (in this case the Quran).

Your response is similar in that there isn't anything tangible behind your ideas. But you are willing to stretch your mind you great expanses, to justify your personal interpretation. Without tangible reality, in contradiction with physical reality and without any second thought.



Also, I should just point out that not all miracles are equal. Some miracles have no current day evidence to affirm or disprove the literal interpretation of their occurance. And some do.

For example:
God creating the universe, or even Jesus rising from the dead. We don't really have a time machine to observe these occurances. And there isn't really any residual evidence that clarifies on the nature of how they had unfolded. There's nothing remaining from these events that would allow us to understand how they occurred.

However, let's take a global flood for example. Well, water leaves evidence. For example, we have water ripple marks in ancient rock. So we know that if this global flood did occur, that we would be able to see residual evidence for it, quite clearly.

The same goes with the age of the earth. The earth is still here for us to look at, so we don't necessarily need a time machine. Just as I don't need a time machine to establish that my grandfather is old, despite me not actually being alive when he was created. He has wrinkled skin, his teeth are falling out, he walks with a cane etc. His features allow me to recognize that he is old, just as the earth does the same for geologists.

And ultimately, the same holds true for the story of Adam and Eve. Our DNA and the fossil succession demonstrate that we, as people, didn't simply appear out of thin air 6,000 years ago, as literalists suggest. The residual evidence remains.

And as scientists who directly study God's creation, not studying man-written words about creation but by studying God's creation itself, we can tell the story of our origins with far more clarity.

 

[miamited]

Hi Mrsfoundit,

Thanks for your response:

Is there any reason to expect that present day scientific standards applied in Eden ? The act of disobedience we call "the Fall", which caused both death and our exclusion from Eden, seems to me to be were we have a universal physical standard begin.

Personally, I believe that present day 'scientific standards' applied as soon as the creation came into existence. However, as God was creating all the bodies of the universe and all the flora and fauna upon the earth, He was performing a miracle. A miracle, by its strictest definition, is something that cannot be explained or proven through any effort or understanding of man.

For example: We now know that light travels at a given speed. This 'scientific standard' allows people to say that the creation must be x number of years old based on our ability to see distant stars. However, if we understand that God can do the impossible and that miraculous actions will never be explainable through any understanding or process known to man, then we can allow that when God swept all of the heavenly bodies across the universe on day 4, the light of each and every star was somehow stretched to be immediately visible to those first creatures living on the earth on day 6.

We cannot explain, through any scientific effort of man, how flood waters covered the entire earth; an entire river and the ground water surrounding it was made to be blood; a deep sea parted so that there was a wall of water standing unaided on both sides of the chasm; how the sun could have possibly stopped in the sky, or that a shadow cast by the sun could possibly go backwards. How a baby was born to a woman who had never had male sperm introduced into her womb. All of the events are miraculous and we have no understanding of how they could have possibly happened...except to merely say and acquiesce that God did it!

For me, the very reason that the Scriptures declare that the heavens declare the glory of God is because of this understanding that everything we gaze upon up there just appeared out of nothing in the span of time of a mere day, by the hand and plan of a God who created it all because He was going to create a creature named man, that He was going to shower with His love, compassion and concern. It is, for me, this understanding of the immediacy of the creation event that makes it all so very, very awesome. If it all coalesced merely by natural processes of space dust swirling around that would have coalesced anyway and that if we had a big enough laboratory we could do it ourselves, then how does that really show the glory of God?

So yes, for me, the story of Adam and Eve is given to be understood literally. The six day creation event was given to be understood literally. The creation of Adam and the following genealogies of his descendants, was given that we might even have a general idea of just how long ago this created realm in which we live came to be.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[faroukfarouk]

Kees what reasons would you give for Adam & Eve not being a literal account?

What is really being said in the OP is that one supposedly can't trust the Bible for anything...

 

[ChetSinger]

If we're Christians we believe that creation exists because of the will of God, that Jesus is his son who was miraculously conceived, died, spent three days in a tomb, rose from the grave, and now lives eternally in a higher realm. And if we put our trust in him he'll change us to live eternally, too.

That's a lot to believe. Yet some Christians, who presumably believe every word of that, don't accept Adam and Eve because secular history tells them not to? That's quite a disconnect, imo.

 

[Kate30]

What is really being said in the OP is that one supposedly can't trust the Bible for anything...

Farouk there are those who do think like that and always shall be until the appointed time.

 

[JackRT]

It's too bad that more Christians don't accept Rabbi Moses Maimonides' advice that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are not to be taken as literal history --- they are folklore and borrowed myth to fill in the gap in the period before the Israelites' emergence as a self-aware cultural entity.

 

[MrsFoundit]

Even with nothing tangible to support their ideas, they will literally believe anything. Even in the face of contrary physically real evidence.

Physically real evidence contrary to a super natural Creator is utterly impossible.

1Much similar to your own, that it comes from not any source, but the source of truth (in this case the Quran).

I have not said anything was "the source of truth".

Your response is similar in that there isn't anything tangible behind your ideas.

Ideas do not come from anything tangible, it is irrelevant whose ideas.

But you are willing to stretch your mind you great expanses, to justify your personal interpretation.

No "stretch" or "justify" is occurring my end.

The same goes with the age of the earth. The earth is still here for us to look at, so we don't necessarily need a time machine.

Genesis is still around to be at looked at.

didn't simply appear out of thin air 6,000 years ago, as literalists suggest.

Genesis does not say we simply appeared out of thin air, so who is suggesting this ?

 

[hedrick]

Of course not. I'm getting increasingly unwilling to tolerate rejection of evidence-based knowledge. When it's restricted to evolution the harm is limited. But once you start going down that path, we've got rejection of global warming, vaccines, and even a resurgence of the flat earth.

One poster did bring up a useful point. Without Adam and Eve we don't have a fall. That has fairly broad implications for theology. Humans evolved to be creatures that learn from mistakes. We were never perfect, and weren't intended to be. As long as we accept that fact, and admit our errors, I think we're accepted by God. Jesus' teachings on judgement suggest that the people who are rejected are those who blatantly reject the good of others, or reject Jesus' message. So Jesus' own teaching isn't particularly at risk. But other theology certainly is.

 

[Job 33:6]

Physically real evidence contrary to a super natural Creator is utterly impossible.



Genesis is still around to be at looked at.



Genesis does not say we simply appeared out of thin air, so who is suggesting this ?

"Physically real evidence contrary to a super natural Creator is utterly impossible."

Physically real evidence, that is contrary to literalist ideas absolutely does exist.

For example:
If someone suggests that there was a global flood that was responsible for the deposition of the world's strata, and you point out that throughout that strata, there are footprints from animals that have walked through, the evidence suggests that on the contrary to a global deluge, life existed in the past as it does today.


You mentioned that Genesis is still around for us to look at. But Genesis, in the most literal sense, consists of ink on paper. Written by...people. People who of course, as all of us, have limitations in knowledge, limitations in experiences and in interpretations.

Example:

Imagine if I told you that I have a cake in the oven.

What do you imagine? Strawberry? Chocolate? Icing and sprinkles? Maybe you imagine a smell, or a taste. Maybe you imagine a warm buttery nature to it.

The truth is that people can read a sentence and can derive countless different interpretations from it. Something as simple as "I have a cake in the oven" can mean countless different things, even something like the idea that a woman may be expecting.

But imagine if you saw and tasted and touched that cake first hand. There would be no question about it's qualities.

If we look at the earth, much like looking at a cake, there isn't much room for interpretation. If the foot tracks are throughout the body of rock, then we know quite simply that it wasn't deposited by a flood.

The earth provides first hand observation of God's creation, whereas scripture, while true, is second hand and requires multiple levels of human interpretation which is inevitably flawed.

No matter how precise the language of the second hand account may be, nothing will be more real than what we mutually experience before our own eyes. So if people's interpretations contradict what we observe, then there is a present issue.

 

[coffee4u]

Just curious. I really don't.

Yes.
God's overall plan is to have a perfect world and a people unto himself. When God says there will be a New Heavens and a New Earth its because the old one has gone.
Isaiah 65:17
"For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind.
2 Peter 3:12-13
looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat! But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.

All through the Old Testament we see foreshadowing. When God told the Israelites in Egypt to eat lamb and put the blood on the door lintels, it wasn't a random command but a foreshadowing of Jesus and what he would do. The same way the original 'perfect' creation was a foreshadowing of the final perfect earth.
Mankind was made in innocence, communing with God, destined to live forever. But perfection was not really perfection because the garden was not the whole earth, Satan was there, and while they were innocent they had before them a test. God knew they would fail and they did. Later on God gave them the law not just because they needed laws but to show mankind that they could not keep God's law in their own strength.
Romans 3:19-20
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

Mankind aware of his sin needed a way out, which is Jesus. But its a choice, because God wants a people who choose him, not people without choice.
Choosing God isn't the last step of the plan because sin means death and while heaven is a goal its not the final goal.

The Bible moves on from that to the second coming and the new heavens and new earth.
Revelation 1:7
BEHOLD, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen.

Then there is the 1000 reign before the new earth.
20 Then I saw an angel descending from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the abyss and a huge chain. 2 seized the dragon—the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan—and tied him up for a thousand years. 3 The angel then threw him into the abyss and locked and sealed it so that he could not deceive the nations until the one thousand years were finished. (After these things he must be released for a brief period of time.)

And there will no longer be heard in her the voice of weeping and the sound of crying. No longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his days; For the youth will die at the age of one hundred and the one who does not reach the age of one hundred Shall be thought accursed. And they shall build houses and inhabit them; they shall also plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They shall not build, and another inhabit, they shall not plant, and another eat; for as the lifetime of a tree, so shall be the days of My people, and My chosen ones shall wear out the work of their hands. They shall not labour in vain, or bear children for calamity; for they are the offspring of those blessed by the LORD, and their descendants with them. It will also come to pass that before they call, I will answer; and while they are still speaking, I will hear. Isaiah 65:19-24

Not this world because 100 right now is very old, and Satan is definitely not tied up yet. Also not talking about heaven because these people are alive but still die. This is also in the 1000 year reign.
1 Corinthians:15-26
The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Creation - Fall -redemption - New Earth.

Creation and the fall isn't just a story to teach some spiritual truth, its God showing us the start of the overall plan, why we are in sin and in need of the saviour, why things happened the way they did and why the New earth is called the New earth. It's going back to what it was but not as a shadow, as the real deal.

 

[MrsFoundit]

Physically real evidence, that is contrary to literalist ideas absolutely does exist.

Are you stating that you can prove a supernatural supreme being cannot do whatever said being is believed to have done without using philosophy ?

You cannot, to apply "physically real evidence" against any such belief is to do it via philosophy. You are dependent on an unproven assumption that truth or reality can and should be tested by scientific method to do it.

 

[MrsFoundit]

If we look at the earth, much like looking at a cake, there isn't much room for interpretation.

There is just oodles of room for interpretation, the entire thing can be seen as an illusion, or a metaphor, or a threat, or a work of art, or a research base, or a mistake...the possibilities are uncountable.