- Mar 28, 2005
- 21,968
- 10,837
- 77
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Charismatic
- Marital Status
- Married
That sounds like tongues. I'll try that at church on Sunday!Perfect example of "logical defenestration".
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That sounds like tongues. I'll try that at church on Sunday!Perfect example of "logical defenestration".
Both Jesus and Paul treated Genesis as a literal account of the events. To them, Adam was a real person. Paul says that, "Death reigned from Adam to Moses", referring to them both as real people who lived at a particular point in history. Paul also says that Eve was deceived, but Adam wasn't, so according to him, Eve was a real person in history as well.if Gen 3 is some sort of abstraction then the crux of the text still shows us that man is fallen and all the products of fallen man still remain the same.
The reason to look at this account as a non-literal account could be for various reasons but a strong one might be that if we assume Moses penned this account through divine authority then this is 2500 years after the fact and that's a long time for an oral account to be preserved without corruption.
Some questions we need to ask are:
What did the post-exodus Hebrew's believe before Moses told them the orthodox account?
Was there competing accounts analogous to the fall of man in surrounding cultures?
Do the post-exodus Hebrews show us a dis-value to truth in favour of false teaching?
Then ask does it matter? If this is a non-literal account then does it affect the main points of the account that man is fallen and needs a redeemer regardless of how it may have actually happened?
The details that make up the account are important but I don't see the surface literal meaning important but rather a greater message being proclaimed in the account. If we are to accept a strict literal account then we should absolutely avoid snakes at all costs because it's just not worth getting caught in their deception again and it shows us that there is a secret garden hidden in the world with the gift of eternal life, but look out its guarded by an angel. These are not productive messages of the account nor are they anything to do with the point of it but a strict literal interpretation demands it.
...I do think that we should be careful not to equivocate between God's requirement for human death as a penalty for sin, on the one hand, and the merely distasteful idea of a "human sacrifice," on the other hand.
If Adam and Eve were not real people in history, then there was no fall, therefore no original sin. If there is no original sin, then the rest of the Bible has to be just another religious book and not the Word of God at all.God's requirement for human death as a penalty for sin?
I think death is simply a requirement for transformation. It is part of the beauty of nature though we are too afflicted by grief to appreciate it. I don't think sin has much to do with it. Jesus was sinless. He died. We all still die in spite of his death and resurrection. I think we are too bonded and bogged down with literal interpretation of Genesis. Even the Catholic Church, while it acknowledges "figurative language" still holds to a primordial couple. To me it seems like clinging to a fond myth.
There are many unassailable proofs that the Bible is literally true, so if it is true in other areas, then Genesis is a true historical record as well.
If Adam and Eve were not real people in history, then there was no fall, therefore no original sin. If there is no original sin, then the rest of the Bible has to be just another religious book and not the Word of God at all.
He does. The Bible is made up of several literary styles - narrative, history, letters, poetry, prophetic. Genesis is an historical narrative. Jesus and Paul treated it as real history involving real people. Myth and metaphor are not literary styles. Metaphor is a figure of speech representative or symbolic of something else. Genesis is definitely not that. Myth is using a false belief or idea, or a traditional story explaining the early history of a people. If your definition of a myth is the second one then it could fit, but that does not change the fact that it is a series of historical facts.Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why can't God also speak through a variety of literary styles.
If Genesis 3 is a metaphor, parable, myth...what ever, then what really happen?
If there was no Garden, no real Adam, no Eve created from Adams side, no serpent, no tree of knowledge of good and evil and no fall Can the Theo-Evo's tell us why we are sinners in need of a savior?
When did mankind sin? What stage of evolution?
Why does mankind sin?
How was mankind thrust into sin in need of a savior?
Then how can you say that the story of Christ's death and resurrection isn't simply a spiritual/metaphorical lesson? What do you actually accept in the Bible as true events?
Both Jesus and Paul treated Genesis as a literal account of the events. To them, Adam was a real person. Paul says that, "Death reigned from Adam to Moses", referring to them both as real people who lived at a particular point in history. Paul also says that Eve was deceived, but Adam wasn't, so according to him, Eve was a real person in history as well.
There are many unassailable proofs that the Bible is literally true, so if it is true in other areas, then Genesis is a true historical record as well.
the pre-Abrahamic accounts of Genesis would be written aprox 1000-2500 years after they took place and major accounts like the creation, flood and separation of languages would have many competing accounts from surrounding cultures, especially those who are more advanced.Then how can you say that the story of Christ's death and resurrection isn't simply a spiritual/metaphorical lesson? What do you actually accept in the Bible as true events?
If Genesis 3 is a metaphor then so are the ten commandments and then there is no commandments.
And what Jesus said to follow the commandments is also not true.
The devil is hard at work trying to change truth into lies.
Why? The commandments were given in Exodus and Deuteronomy not Genesis.
At some point the parental ancestors of all living humans committed an act of sin/disobedience against God. And all humanity was directly negatively affected by that act. That was literal fact. Some of the language and figures used in the story were symbolic or figurative.
I agree. But I was referring to humanity and how the Theistic Evolutionist perceives it.Okay. I'll play.
Sin began when Lucifer got proud and tried to be equal with God. That is also why and how sin began. It did not begin with Adam and Eve. It was already there with Satan who came to Eve in the form of a talking serpent.
If there was no garden, no serpent, and Adam and Eve are just characters- so what? We don't lose the knowledge that our fallen nature is the result of the sins of our common parents, and that it resulted in their expulsion from Paradise.
The Garden of Eden is God's rest, righteousness. The Garden story is the 2nd creation story. God's children have 2 creations. We are born into this world and then created anew into righteousness or God's rest. Man cannot achieve righteousness through his own efforts but must depend on God to grant him this through faith.
In the Garden is the Tree of Life, which is Jesus, whom God's children are free to eat from and live. There is also the Tree of Knowledge, which is the Mosaic Law. All of the different animals are the Gentiles, just like Peter's vision in Acts. Adam and Eve are the Hebrew Nation. The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge is the desire to justify oneself by obedience to the Law. Trying to do so brings death to those who sin.
After God brought Israel out of Egypt, they looked back upon what they were called out of, just as Lot's wife looked back. They built an idol to worship and doubted God and could not re-enter God's rest, just as Adam and Eve were expelled from God's rest, Eden.
Just as Adam was cursed to till the soil, which is man's works, the Jews also had to work. Paul's description of the law and works from Romans expresses this.
Genesis is full of allegorical stories depicting Jesus and prophecies of what was to come.
My reply was in response to Theo-Evoism and how they would say an evolving population would sin.One definition of sin is disobeying a written commandment. Another type of sin is not knowing to do right in the absence of proper written commandments, resulting in sin and loss.
Jesus came to give light to the world. As John testified, the light shined in the darkness, but the darkness perceived it not (John 1:5). Looking for the Garden of Eden is like looking into the darkness; the place can not be found. Believing Jesus' teachings is like the approaching dawn.
Should I strike the verses out of Romans, 1 Corinthians and Acts?Some things are just natural consequences and bad habits yield bad results. I don't buy the "one man mythology". Even since we as humans could make choices we sometimes choose badly.
So in my view Jesus saves us primarily by his moral example rather than by some expiation to a God that requires a human sacrifice.
Is that your belief, that the Father required the death of Jesus befor humans could be forgiven?