How does representation by Adam make any sense?

[hedrick]

http://www.mhrc.net/mitochondrialEve.htm

This doesn't say much that's relevant to theology. Yes, there was a women we all descend from. The same statistical approach that says that says some other things:

• There were many women we all descend from.
• Mitocondrial Eve is defined as the latest of these. As people die, the identity of Mitocondrial Eve changes.
• There were other women alive at the same time as Mitocondrial Eve
• There's a male equivalent, but he wouldn't have been alive at the same time.

This is just nothing like the Adam and Eve from Genesis 2.

The one point of original sin that does make sense is that we inherit our nature, and that nature does not lead to perfect lives. But that it resulted from a perfect pair falling isn't possible in any literal sense.

I use "imperfect" rather than "corrupted" because corrupted suggests that there was at one point an uncorrupted nature. Actually I have qualms even about the term imperfect, because that suggests that human nature is defective. I believe God always intended us to learn by trial and error. That's a reasonable approach to designing beings that can adapt to many different situations. That means we were always intended to be justified by grace. As long as we live in communion with God, we certainly make mistakes and sins, but there's a limit to how serious they can be. It's when we reject him and his teachings that things start getting really bad.

 

[cfyahoo08]

This doesn't say much that's relevant to theology. Yes, there was a women we all descend from. The same statistical approach that says that says some other things:

• There were many women we all descend from.
• Mitocondrial Eve is defined as the latest of these. As people die, the identity of Mitocondrial Eve changes.
• There were other women alive at the same time as Mitocondrial Eve
• There's a male equivalent, but he wouldn't have been alive at the same time.

This is just nothing like the Adam and Eve from Genesis 2.

The one point of original sin that does make sense is that we inherit our nature, and that nature does not lead to perfect lives. But that it resulted from a perfect pair falling isn't possible in any literal sense.

"nothing like" Well sort of like in that they are beginning to recognize that we had origin in a single "Eve" and a single "Adam" they will eventually figure it out.

1 Corinthians 2:14 King James Version (KJV)
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[hedrick]

"nothing like" Well sort of like in that they are beginning to recognize that we had origin in a single "Eve" and a single "Adam" they will eventually figure it out.

1 Corinthians 2:14 King James Version (KJV)
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

As I get older I'm getting less and less sympathetic with people who reject evidence in favor of ideology. If it were just Genesis, it would be minimally dangerous. But the same reasoning leads to rejecting global warming, vaccines, and sane economics. Christians should be leaders in accepting truth whereever it leads.

 

[cfyahoo08]

As I get older I'm getting less and less sympathetic with people who reject evidence in favor of ideology. If it were just Genesis, it would be minimally dangerous. But the same reasoning leads to rejecting global warming, vaccines, and sane economics. Christians should be leaders in accepting truth whereever it leads.

King James Bible - Philippians 4:8

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

Everyone should be entitled to their own thoughts/views / opinions.

Sadly there is such a thing as "JUNK SCIENCE" i.e. those that have pre-determined outcomes or are motivated by the source of the scientific funding. Pure Science should purely use the scientific method to determine outcome and that is hardly the case.

 

[hedrick]

Sadly there is such a thing as "JUNK SCIENCE" i.e. those that have pre-determined outcomes or are motivated by the source of the scientific funding. Pure Science should purely use the scientific method to determine outcome and that is hardly the case.

Sorry, you can't call everything that disagrees with traditional Christian theology junk science. Rejection of new knowledge because of tradition is precisely what the Reformers fought. Interestingly, the Catholic church now largely accepts evidence.

 

[cfyahoo08]

Sorry, you can't call everything that disagrees with traditional Christian theology junk science. Rejection of new knowledge because of tradition is precisely what the Reformers fought. Interestingly, the Catholic church now largely accepts evidence.

I had NOT called anything you reference in your list of things into question. Just pointing out that there is such a thing as "Junk Science" .

 

[hedrick]

I had NOT called anything you reference in your list of things into question. Just pointing out that there is such a thing as "Junk Science" .

Of course there is. Much of it is ideologically based, but there's a fair amount of "group think." The nice thing about science is that group think eventually gets corrected.

 

[cfyahoo08]

Of course there is.

And there is also a time for everything - We should VERY Carefully evaluate the credibility of those purporting "evidence" of things both Scientific and Spiritual/Religious in nature, different set of tools to determine that credibility but none the less both should be looked at carefully.

Ecclesiastes 3 (KJV)

3 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

 

[Sabertooth]

Do I understand you correctly, eg if my dad is in jail for crime that makes me guilty too just for being his son?

No.

..., more specifically, the sin nature is hereditary.

 

[Sabertooth]

I don't believe your born spiritually dead. that would be quite sad for all of humanity if that were the case.

It IS sad. But there is Good News, too!

 

[throughfiierytrial]

It has not been known that the first humans were ever without sin. History goes back about 5000 years when people started to put crude symbols on clay storage jars to record their contents. Human life began before 5000 years ago.

The Adam and Eve story may be understood allegorically. If you eat from the wrong tree, you might get poisoned and die. If God tells you not to eat that fruit, believe it.

Well you view the Scriptures in a very different light than do I and many other Christians. Romans (written in A.D.) quotes from it as does I Timothy.

 

[throughfiierytrial]

Yet David’s son was put to death because of his father’s sin.

Also,

Exodus 20:4-6 NIV

Don't you suppose Scripture is talking about eternal death?

 

[Marvin Knox]

o why does Adam's sin make all humans sinners, at least as far as I understand mainstream Christian theology?

It doesn't make all humans sinners. It makes all humans prone to sin. (I.e. "total depravity" - If I understand theology correctly.)

Total depravity simply means that every aspect of fallen humanity is effected in a negative way by our sinful nature. In that way we are all prone to sin.

People say, well it works the same way as Christ representing you. No, it doesn't. With Christ, he is your representative through personal association: faith. Whereas I couldn't care about Adam. It makes no sense.

Yes it does.
We are personally associated with Adam. We are accounted guilty because we all sin in the likeness of Adam.

We sin because of a lack of faith in God's Word just as did Adam.

We are justified and placed in Christ because of faith in God's Word.

I totally agree with you in that both you and I don't much like the situation God has allowed us to be born into.

But then there isn't much I can do about it. It's the ordained program of the sovereign creator of all things.

The only thing I can do is be sure that I am found in Christ come judgment day.

In that way I'll be in a much better state when all things are made new and the new program begins.

 

[Serving Zion]

All men are born dead because they are born separated from the tree of life. Therefore they are sinners from birth.

That is a false-cause fallacy. How do you reconcile St Paul saying he was alive before the commandment came?

 

[Serving Zion]

It was in some podcast, can't remember which but I think it was about the concept of headship and Christ being the second Adam or something.

I see. I hate when that happens! Thanks for checking, it seems he must have been forced to some rather extreme thinking while attempting to rationalise his beliefs..

 

[Sabertooth]

So why does Adam's sin make all humans sinners, at least as far as I understand mainstream Christian theology?

The responses in this thread supply you with two clear choices.

1. Original Sin. Our ultimate human ancestor was corrupted and guaranteed that state to all descendant humanity. The only available salvation is through Grace, by Faith in Jesus.
2. There is no Original Sin, so it's every man for himself. If you are stupid enough to give in to Sin, you DESERVE Hell (and no one can save you)!!! That is called "salvation" by works and Paul had a lot to say about that.

 

[Serving Zion]

The responses in this thread supply you with two clear choices.

1. Original Sin. Our ultimate human ancestor was corrupted and guaranteed that state to all descendant humanity. The only available salvation is through Grace, by Faith in Jesus.
2. There is no Original Sin, so it's every man for himself. If you are stupid enough to give in to Sin, you DESERVE Hell (and no one can save you)!!! That is called "salvation" by works and Paul had a lot to say about that.

It isn't right to say "stupid" of them, but naive. It is the same way people wind up believing false doctrine: they have trusted someone that has misled them.

 

[συνείδησις]

That is a false-cause fallacy. How do you reconcile St Paul saying he was alive before the commandment came?

IMO Paul was referring to the time before he realized what the commandment actually meant. He thought he was honky dory, then the commandment came to his understanding, and he died, figuratively speaking. It's a grand assumption to think that he meant he was spiritually alive before that point.

 

[Serving Zion]

IMO Paul was referring to the time before he realized what the commandment actually meant. He thought he was honky dory, then the commandment came to his understanding, and he died, figuratively speaking.

No kidding!

It's a grand assumption to think that he meant he was spiritually alive before that point.

 

[Serving Zion]

No kidding!

@συνείδησις , .. just, you will need to explain how you think being spiritually alive is different than being in the state of innocence before "figuratively dying" as a result of resisting the commandment.