Old testament?

[goodwithoutgod]

As I understand, Christian belief is based on BOTH old and new testaments, i.e. you use passages from old and new testaments accordingly in your teaching.

Do you "literally" believe in Adam and Eve and the evil snake, or Noah's Ark? Do you take those stories as historical facts? If not, then how can you believe anything else in the book literally, for example, how the world was created, or the existence of God itself?

There are many parts in the bible that do not sit well with the ethical standards of the 21st century, such as approval of slavery, the stoning of a bride to death if found out not to be virgin on the wedding night etc.

You know God created the world and you'll go to heaven after death because the bible tells you so. Do you stone a woman to death because bible tells you so? If the bible is The Word of God, The Truth, then how can you cherry pick only the parts that are convenient for you in today's day and age, and discard the rest?

This is one of the questions I asked and were left unanswered at the Alpha Course.

 

[bsd31]

As I understand, Christian belief is based on BOTH old and new testaments, i.e. you use passages from old and new testaments accordingly in your teaching.

Do you "literally" believe in Adam and Eve and the evil snake, or Noah's Ark? Do you take those stories as historical facts? If not, then how can you believe anything else in the book literally, for example, how the world was created, or the existence of God itself?

There are many parts in the bible that do not sit well with the ethical standards of the 21st century, such as approval of slavery, the stoning of a bride to death if found out not to be virgin on the wedding night etc.

You know God created the world and you'll go to heaven after death because the bible tells you so. Do you stone a woman to death because bible tells you so? If the bible is The Word of God, The Truth, then how can you cherry pick only the parts that are convenient for you in today's day and age, and discard the rest?

This is one of the questions I asked and were left unanswered at the Alpha Course.

Left unanswered or not answered to your liking? There is a difference and it does matter. If no one gave you an answer then I can see why you are confused but if they answered and you didn't like what you heard I doubt you'll hear much different from any other Christians.

But just in case...

1) Do you literally believe in:
a) Adam and Eve - Yes. I believe there were literally two people one male and one female that were the "parents" of the human race.

b) The evil snake - Not literally a talking snake, but a deceptive and manipulative "presence". The word "serpent" used in Genesis 3 is the Hebrew word nachash which means to practice divination, observe signs (strong concordance)

c) Noah's Ark - Yes.

I take them all as historical facts. But that's not necessarily is important about them. That there were two human beings we now call "Adam and Eve" isn't important. That they disobeyed God is.

That there was an entity, a nachash, that deceived Adam and Eve isn't important. That Adam and Eve trusted him over God is.

That there was a flood that wiped out almost all of humanity isn't important. That the man we call Noah built and ark and obeyed God is important.

You are correct there are many parts of the scriptures that don't align themselves well with our corrupt and depraved 21st century morals. But the examples you gave (slavery, stoning of the bride) are not those kind of scriptures.

If you carefully study what God has to say about slavery you will find there is nothing condoning it in the scriptures. Everything you read in the Bible concerning slavery is either about protecting slaves from cruel and abusive masters or is a foreshadowing that tells how the Christian willingly becomes the Lord's slave.

Now you might ask yourself why a woman should be stoned to death if she were not a virgin. There are several things going on. First it is a direct disregard of God's law. Second she was deceptive. The second, deception, being more important than the first. Why? Because lying is an abomination to God.

But again it is important not to try and corrupt Biblical teachings with our 21st century moral mess.

I know I'll go to heaven for one reason and one reason only. I believe on Jesus Christ to get me there. I won't get to heaven because the Bible "tells you so". I won't get to heaven because I've led a good life. I won't get to heaven because I pray or give to the poor. I won't get to heaven because I follow the law of God perfectly (which I don't).

There is absolutely nothing I can ever do that will earn me entry into heaven. Except believe that Jesus Christ has died for my sins and been risen from the dead.

That is the totality of the Christian faith. Believe on the Son of God and be given life eternal. It's not about obeying laws or teachings. It's not about the 10 commandments, or trying to chose which regulations to follow from day to day. It is about Christ and Christ alone because only He can get you to heaven. We as people play absolutely no part in it. Even our faith comes from God and is not a product of our own decision making.

 

[aiki]

As I understand, Christian belief is based on BOTH old and new testaments, i.e. you use passages from old and new testaments accordingly in your teaching.

Keep in mind that the New Testament is called the New Testament for a reason.

Do you "literally" believe in Adam and Eve and the evil snake, or Noah's Ark?

Yes.

Do you take those stories as historical facts?

Yes.

If not, then how can you believe anything else in the book literally, for example, how the world was created, or the existence of God itself?

How indeed?

There are many parts in the bible that do not sit well with the ethical standards of the 21st century, such as approval of slavery,

Whoa, there! The Bible approves of slavery? You sure about that? Or are you making some assumptions here? If you look closely at the "slavery" in the nation of Israel as it is presented in the Bible it is far more like indentured servitude than true slavery. And no where in the New Testament is there any verse which says, "God approves of slavery."

the stoning of a bride to death if found out not to be virgin on the wedding night etc.

Chapter and verse please. Thanks. Modern western culture is pretty slack about adultery, sexual promiscuity, fornication, etc.. If t.v. and the movies are any indication, everybody's sleeping around these days. Steeped as we are in a culture that is perfectly easy with sexual sin, it can be hard to understand why the response was so severe to it in the OT. The Israelites were in a theocracy. The perfectly holy Creator of the universe was ruling the nation and this was to be reflected in every facet of the Israelite culture - including sexual practices. Sleeping around before you married was not reflective of God's holiness.

You know God created the world and you'll go to heaven after death because the bible tells you so. Do you stone a woman to death because bible tells you so?

I'm sorry, but where does the Bible tell me to stone a woman to death? Are you trying to apply to a Gentile Christian of today rules and commands God gave explicitly and specifically to the Israelites? I hope not. You need to make a distinction between the laws God gave particularly to the Israelites in order to make them clearly and sharply separate from the pagan nations around them and those laws which apply to all people at all times. They are not the same. Not having a tattoo or avoiding eating shellfish were part of how the Israelites lived separately from other nations and how they reminded themselves of that separateness. Prohibitions against murder or homosexuality, however, were universal and unchanging laws for all people.

If the bible is The Word of God, The Truth, then how can you cherry pick only the parts that are convenient for you in today's day and age, and discard the rest?

Who's "cherry picking"? Christians conduct themselves, ideally, after the manner commanded in Scripture. And Scripture makes it crystal clear that the OT ceremonial and separation laws of the Israelites do not apply to those under the New Covenant or Testament. Read Galatians, Hebrews and/or Romans for a better understanding of this matter.

This is one of the questions I asked and were left unanswered at the Alpha Course.

That's too bad. Were you at the course because you are open to the faith, or to simply confound those who were running it?

Selah.

 

[goodwithoutgod]

Left unanswered or not answered to your liking?

They didn't answer my question because they didn't understand the question. They went on telling me all different things that I didn't ask about, and after going round and round I gave up.

What I meant by "cherry picking" also includes "interpreting the meaning of the script as you see fit," and that's the whole point of this question.

So you literally believe that there were two people that started the human race, but you conclude that a talking snake is a metaphor, rather than a literal fact. Why?

Is it because a talking snake competes with your idea of "what's plausible", based on your experience and knowledge? If you're not familiar with the term "cognitive dissonance", I urge you to look it up.

The nub of my question is, if you think old testament is NOT a "collection of undeniable, undisputed facts" (i.e. some are facts, some are metaphors/symbols/myths), then where's the integrity of the literature and the reason for believing in any of it?

 

[goodwithoutgod]

How indeed?

Well, if you believe in all of it, then my question is not for you. My question is for those who do not literally believe in things written in OT.

I used the parts regarding slavery and stoning just as examples, it doesn't matter what the examples are, it's about the integrity of OT as a whole.

That's too bad. Were you at the course because you are open to the faith, or to simply confound those who were running it?

I was open and genuinely interested in learning more about Christianity and had some questions. I'm a curious person. I wasn't there to debate or argue or challenge their faith.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

As I understand, Christian belief is based on BOTH old and new testaments, i.e. you use passages from old and new testaments accordingly in your teaching.

It's not "based" on them, it's based on Jesus of Nazareth who we receive and believe is the Christ and the received teaching of His apostles. The Bible is a collection of books that have been received by the Church as a faithful witness to the faith of the Church which communicate and proclaim God's Word (Jesus) to us.

Do you "literally" believe in Adam and Eve and the evil snake, or Noah's Ark? Do you take those stories as historical facts? If not, then how can you believe anything else in the book literally, for example, how the world was created, or the existence of God itself?

When you go into a library and find The Hobbit, by J.R.R. Tolkien as well as a copy of A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking you don't immediately treat both books as the same genre do you? You don't say to yourself, "Because I take Hawking's book literally, I must also believe in a literal Middle Earth and that Bilbo Baggins was an historical figure from the Shire." Right? You understand that even both these books came from the same library they have different authorial intents, they are different categories of literary genre.

The Bible is a library of books of mixed literary genre from different time periods and different locations. Proper biblical exegesis means seeking to understand and apply correct heremeneutics to the texts to make sure we read what they are saying and not impose our own views into the texts.

There are many parts in the bible that do not sit well with the ethical standards of the 21st century, such as approval of slavery, the stoning of a bride to death if found out not to be virgin on the wedding night etc.

That's true. It also taught them to welcome the foreigners among them and all of the poor were to be taken care of. I've noticed that in the 21st century such concepts such as helping the unfortunate and welcoming strangers and immigrants don't seem to sit well as ethical and moral.

You know God created the world and you'll go to heaven after death because the bible tells you so.

No, I don't know that. I believe that God Created the cosmos and my hope is that I'll be with Him in the Age to Come. But I don't know either of these to be true.

Do you stone a woman to death because bible tells you so?

The Bible doesn't tell me to stone anyone. The Bible informs me that when a woman was about to be stoned to death Jesus stopped it from happening and that likewise I am to be compassionate and kind to others.

If the bible is The Word of God, The Truth,

The Bible is not "The Truth", such a designation toward a book/collection of books is rather sacrilegious as God is Truth, Christ is the Truth as we confess, but the Bible isn't "The Truth", though we regard it as true and inspired.

then how can you cherry pick only the parts that are convenient for you in today's day and age, and discard the rest?

Torah was given to the Jewish people on Mt. Sinai as part of a covenant God made with them, a Covenant which still stands. The Torah consists of 613 mitzvot or "commandments" which were given as instruction and which the Jewish people have wrestled with and sought to understand for hundreds of years and which have many rulings by the rabbis to help them understand how to better follow Torah.

Torah was never for Gentiles, and Christians (especially Gentile Christians) have never been expected to be Torah-observant.

Our covenant relationship with God is in and through Jesus, not the Torah.

This is one of the questions I asked and were left unanswered at the Alpha Course.

The issue of Christians and Torah-observance was more-or-less settled at the Council of Jerusalem, which is recorded in the 15th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[drich0150]

As I understand, Christian belief is based on BOTH old and new testaments, i.e. you use passages from old and new testaments accordingly in your teaching.

yes

Do you "literally" believe in Adam and Eve and the evil snake, or Noah's Ark? Do you take those stories as historical facts?

yes

If not, then how can you believe anything else in the book literally, for example, how the world was created, or the existence of God itself?

good question.

There are many parts in the bible that do not sit well with the ethical standards of the 21st century, such as approval of slavery,

Whether popular culture is willing to accept this concept or not, we are all still in slavery. We are all bound against our will to sin. If you do not believe this to be true then try and live your life without sin, and see how long you last. As a slave we need to understand God standards on slavery so that we may continue to navigate the waters we live in.

the stoning of a bride to death if found out not to be virgin on the wedding night etc.

The OT Law was divided into 3 distinct aspects. Moral Law of God(which still applies) and the ceremonial and social laws of God, which was intended only for the OT Jews. Stoning of a bride is not apart of the moral law.

You know God created the world and you'll go to heaven after death because the bible tells you so. Do you stone a woman to death because bible tells you so?

Not unless I was an OT Jew, if I was then yes.

If the bible is The Word of God, The Truth, then how can you cherry pick only the parts that are convenient for you in today's day and age, and discard the rest?

This is accomplished by simply reading the bible.

This is one of the questions I asked and were left unanswered at the Alpha Course.

Not sure what that is.

 

[bling]

As I understand, Christian belief is based on BOTH old and new testaments, i.e. you use passages from old and new testaments accordingly in your teaching.

Do you "literally" believe in Adam and Eve and the evil snake, or Noah's Ark? Do you take those stories as historical facts? If not, then how can you believe anything else in the book literally, for example, how the world was created, or the existence of God itself?

There are many parts in the bible that do not sit well with the ethical standards of the 21st century, such as approval of slavery, the stoning of a bride to death if found out not to be virgin on the wedding night etc.

You know God created the world and you'll go to heaven after death because the bible tells you so. Do you stone a woman to death because bible tells you so? If the bible is The Word of God, The Truth, then how can you cherry pick only the parts that are convenient for you in today's day and age, and discard the rest?

This is one of the questions I asked and were left unanswered at the Alpha Course.

First off, I think it is great you are in an Alpha Course, please stick with it even if all your questions are not answered right away. These are not simple answers, but take lots of joint study.

Old Testament in general:

The OT has what we need to prepare the way for Christ. It is a support for understanding Christ and God. The Jews used the OT as their book, but it was to especially help them to be prepared for the Messiah.

Both the OT and NT were written to help Christians, but it is just one tool in their tool box. The Bible is not written to convert non Christians (although it has done that sometimes), but is for Christians.

You have to remember we are not trying to “sell” you on a book or even a “message” God is trying to help you and just want you to accept His help. God is Love and so what we are trying to sell you on is allowing God to love you and through seeing that Love, experiencing that Love, and receiving that love, you would want that love for yourself.

It does not matter if you believe in a “literal” Adam and Eve to get the message from the story and there is a ton of information conveyed in that short story. I think I could write a book of information we learn from the Adam and Eve story. We learn about God, man, satan, temptation, sin, heaven, relationship, why everything is the way it is and why we are not all in a Garden type situation. Agnostics, atheist, and most everyone at sometime ask: “How could a Loving God allow _____ to happen?” They really wonder why God did not put us all in a Garden of Eden type situation. God gives us this story right off to show why the Garden situation is a lousy place for humans to fulfill their earthly objective. We can then go from there to see that this tragic filled world is actually the best place for us to fulfill our objective. (Another lengthy subject)

You are not going to be able and take the Bible (OT or NT) and show scientifically (perfection beyond man’s ability) that the Christian God has to exist. That would mean you could know from knowledge the Christian God exits and not need faith in the existence of God. Since even a little “faith” is needed to help you fulfill your objective, removing the need for faith does not help and even works against you. (Another lengthy subject)

There are some huge differences between the Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT) that have to be seen from their objective. Under the OT you have a physical earthly nation that is to be God’s select group to fulfill a specific purpose with national borders. One thing, it shows is how impossible it is for the people to live the way needed to be God’s nation on earth. They do not and cannot live that good, so they will have to depend (trust) on God’s mercy (humbly accept God’s Charity/forgiveness/Grace/Love).

The objective was never to make this world a heaven here on earth or the Jewish nation deserving of salvation.

Slavery was a fact of life, but for the most part it was the system of continuous employment and contrasted to day laborers of the time. There were hired hands in the first century, but that was not like being an employee in the USA today. If you go back to the way God instructed Jews to treat other people you would see they were to treat their “slaves” much better (like employees) than the norm of the time. Jewish slaves were to be free every 7th year and gentiles could become Jews at any time so they would be freed also in the remaining 7 years and would have a lot of great exposure to the truth while among the Jews to help that to happen.

There is always the way it was “supposed to work” under God’s rules and the way it did work after man corrupted it.

Stoning was done for lots of stuff under the Old Law and if the Jews followed that “Old Law” to the letter of the “Law” few if any Jews would have survived. That does not mean the Law is bad, because the Law is “Just” and wonderful, but sin is really bad in God’s eyes. If the Jewish (nation) people were to be Jehovah’s representatives on earth they had to be perfect which is not possible, so does God have to give them an easy “law” or do the people need to go to God humbly trusting and accepting God’s mercy?

 

[aiki]

Well, if you believe in all of it, then my question is not for you. My question is for those who do not literally believe in things written in OT.

This wasn't the impression you gave from some of the things you wrote.

I used the parts regarding slavery and stoning just as examples, it doesn't matter what the examples are, it's about the integrity of OT as a whole.

The "whole" is made up of parts. And the parts you used to characterize the whole were not, as I explained, legitimate.

Anywhoo...I shall bow out of this thread without any further comment.

Selah.

 

[AlexBP]

Do you "literally" believe in Adam and Eve and the evil snake, or Noah's Ark? Do you take those stories as historical facts? If not, then how can you believe anything else in the book literally, for example, how the world was created, or the existence of God itself?

Any book that I read, from The Complete Works of Shakespeare to a calculus text book to The Joy of Cooking to the phone book, consists of many parts. Necessarily some parts of each of these books are more significant to my life than others; why would it be otherwise with the Bible?

There are many parts in the bible that do not sit well with the ethical standards of the 21st century, such as approval of slavery, the stoning of a bride to death if found out not to be virgin on the wedding night etc.

In the 21st century most people approve of slavery. They may not be willing to say so in public, but it's clear from their actions. Many of the clothes on sale in your local mall were made by slaves. Some of the foods on sale at your local supermarket were made by slaves. As long as people are willing to buy these things, they clearly approve of slavery. As for stoning women to death for adultery, I would take Jesus' position:

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11 “No one, sir,” she said.
“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.” [John 8:1-11]

​

 

[elman]

As I understand, Christian belief is based on BOTH old and new testaments, i.e. you use passages from old and new testaments accordingly in your teaching.

Do you "literally" believe in Adam and Eve and the evil snake, or Noah's Ark? Do you take those stories as historical facts? If not, then how can you believe anything else in the book literally, for example, how the world was created, or the existence of God itself?

There are many parts in the bible that do not sit well with the ethical standards of the 21st century, such as approval of slavery, the stoning of a bride to death if found out not to be virgin on the wedding night etc.

You know God created the world and you'll go to heaven after death because the bible tells you so. Do you stone a woman to death because bible tells you so? If the bible is The Word of God, The Truth, then how can you cherry pick only the parts that are convenient for you in today's day and age, and discard the rest?

This is one of the questions I asked and were left unanswered at the Alpha Course.

I don't think the correct way to find divine truth is to insist on the Bible being understood literally. You question how can you cherry pick only parts and discard other parts. I ask how can you do anything else? It is not possible to take all parts of the Bible and focus on them equally. Everybody cherry picks including those who deny doing so. Skeptics also cherry pick looking for parts that they can hold over the heads of believers and ignoring the parts that are clearly divine wisdom. I can accept Ezekeil 18 for example as a teaching of divine wisdom and truth but question the truth of some parts of the bible. Why is your point valid that I cannot accept truth where I find it unless I also accept the part that is not true?

 

[elman]

Left unanswered or not answered to your liking? There is a difference and it does matter. If no one gave you an answer then I can see why you are confused but if they answered and you didn't like what you heard I doubt you'll hear much different from any other Christians.

But just in case...

1) Do you literally believe in:
a) Adam and Eve - Yes. I believe there were literally two people one male and one female that were the "parents" of the human race.

b) The evil snake - Not literally a talking snake, but a deceptive and manipulative "presence". The word "serpent" used in Genesis 3 is the Hebrew word nachash which means to practice divination, observe signs (strong concordance)

c) Noah's Ark - Yes.

I take them all as historical facts. But that's not necessarily is important about them. That there were two human beings we now call "Adam and Eve" isn't important. That they disobeyed God is.

That there was an entity, a nachash, that deceived Adam and Eve isn't important. That Adam and Eve trusted him over God is.

That there was a flood that wiped out almost all of humanity isn't important. That the man we call Noah built and ark and obeyed God is important.

You are correct there are many parts of the scriptures that don't align themselves well with our corrupt and depraved 21st century morals. But the examples you gave (slavery, stoning of the bride) are not those kind of scriptures.

If you carefully study what God has to say about slavery you will find there is nothing condoning it in the scriptures. Everything you read in the Bible concerning slavery is either about protecting slaves from cruel and abusive masters or is a foreshadowing that tells how the Christian willingly becomes the Lord's slave.

Now you might ask yourself why a woman should be stoned to death if she were not a virgin. There are several things going on. First it is a direct disregard of God's law. Second she was deceptive. The second, deception, being more important than the first. Why? Because lying is an abomination to God.

But again it is important not to try and corrupt Biblical teachings with our 21st century moral mess.

I know I'll go to heaven for one reason and one reason only. I believe on Jesus Christ to get me there. I won't get to heaven because the Bible "tells you so". I won't get to heaven because I've led a good life. I won't get to heaven because I pray or give to the poor. I won't get to heaven because I follow the law of God perfectly (which I don't).

There is absolutely nothing I can ever do that will earn me entry into heaven. Except believe that Jesus Christ has died for my sins and been risen from the dead.

That is the totality of the Christian faith. Believe on the Son of God and be given life eternal. It's not about obeying laws or teachings. It's not about the 10 commandments, or trying to chose which regulations to follow from day to day. It is about Christ and Christ alone because only He can get you to heaven. We as people play absolutely no part in it. Even our faith comes from God and is not a product of our own decision making.

Love is doing something and if you do not love other you are not a child of God. First John.

 

[goodwithoutgod]

When you go into a library and find The Hobbit, by J.R.R. Tolkien as well as a copy of A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking you don't immediately treat both books as the same genre do you? You don't say to yourself, "Because I take Hawking's book literally, I must also believe in a literal Middle Earth and that Bilbo Baggins was an historical figure from the Shire." Right? You understand that even both these books came from the same library they have different authorial intents, they are different categories of literary genre.

I'm confused. According to your belief, is Genesis the equivalent of Hobbit, or A Brief History of Time?

Proper biblical exegesis means seeking to understand and apply correct heremeneutics to the texts to make sure we read what they are saying and not impose our own views into the texts.

Whoa, you love big words. I guess what you are trying to say here is "we should try to interpret the text correctly by careful examination, instead of assuming what it means." Am I right? I agree with you, that's a sensible statement, but that does not answer my question.

Don't Christians need to accept the Adam and Eve and the evil snake episode as a fact? Because, if you don't believe in the story, which is the origin of sin and how it was introduced, and if you don't admit that you are a sinner, then you won't need a Christ the saviour and there will be no Christianity.

According to you, are the speaking snake and the guy who spent 3 days in a whale and another guy who parted the sea in two fiction or non-fiction?

If you think they are non-fiction, then that's fine, you've got your story straight, but if you think they are fiction, is any part of OT credible to you? If it's fiction or not credible, why believe it and live by it?

I'm only asking for your take on what to believe in OT. I'm not asking you to prove or justify anything. Surely it's not such a hard question to answer for a Christian?

 

[CryptoLutheran]

I'm confused. According to your belief, is Genesis the equivalent of Hobbit, or A Brief History of Time?

Neither. Though probably closer to The Silmarillion. Genesis 1 is a mythopoetic text functioning as a narrative polemic against standard ancient near eastern creation myths by deconstructing common motifs such as waters of the deep (which would correspond to Tiamut from the Enuma Elish) and presenting God as supreme. The text also functions as a Temple narrative, where God is being presented as constructing His temple, and it is not made from stone and mortar, but rather it is the entire cosmos; the final act is God setting His image in this temple: mankind to bear and reflect His image ("So God made humanity in His own image, in His own image they were made, male and female He created them." - Genesis 1:27)

This is, as I said before, all done mythopoetically, the Framework Hypothesis is my general position on the first chapter of Genesis.

Whoa, you love big words. I guess what you are trying to say here is "we should try to interpret the text correctly by careful examination, instead of assuming what it means." Am I right? I agree with you, that's a sensible statement, but that does not answer my question.

Don't Christians need to accept the Adam and Eve and the evil snake episode as a fact?

As literal and historic fact? Not all of us. Young Earth Creationism is a position in Christianity, but it's not the only position.

I, for one, view the Eden/Fall Narrative as--from a sociological viewpoint as possibly describing a vestigial mythos describing the transition of human society from nomadic to agrarian. The curse placed upon man is that he will have to till the field to grow crops, rather than partake of the abundance of the garden. It is also dealing with the fundamental problem of why things seem, at a deep level, very wrong in the world--a motif that seems to occur several times in Scripture that generally is that we're the ones screwing things up.

Theologically I read the text as seeing how we, as human beings (as Adam), have failed and have fallen.

Because, if you don't believe in the story, which is the origin of sin and how it was introduced, and if you don't admit that you are a sinner, then you won't need a Christ the saviour and there will be no Christianity.

Perhaps in an exceptionally simplistic view of Christianity.

However, Original Sin (or Ancestral Sin, as Christians of the East refer to it) does not require a man named Adam and a woman named Eve who lived around 6,000 years ago who spoke to a snake and ate from fruit from a tree. What would be necessary, in the case of the Western notion of Original Sin, is that there was a point in time when we fell; and Adam in this case describes that unique instance in evolution where we have a definitively modern human being in whom God invested the Divine Image and Likeness and a sense of the spiritual--i.e. the capacity for communion and fellowship with God which was fractured by our own mistakes.

In any event, the fact of sin can be seen from a Christian viewpoint in the simple fact that we, as human beings, are often selfish, arrogant, murderous and consistently acting in ways that are malevolent toward our neighbor. The message of Christ does not change, sin is very much a real problem regardless of how one interprets Adam and Eve in Genesis 3.

According to you, are the speaking snake and the guy who spent 3 days in a whale and another guy who parted the sea in two fiction or non-fiction?

I think there was probably some sort of Adam, though the point of the story isn't history, it's theology. The story of Jonah is probably a morality tale. I take the story of Moses and the Exodus as history.

If you think they are non-fiction, then that's fine, you've got your story straight, but if you think they are fiction, is any part of OT credible to you? If it's fiction or not credible, why believe it and live by it?

You're creating a false dichotomy. There are shades, layers, subtleties and nuances in the text. Making sure we understand what the text is really trying to tell us (we call this exegesis, which means "to draw out from") rather than imposing our own views (which is called eisegesis, "putting into").

It's not a dichotomy between fiction and non-fiction, but rather understanding if a text is historical, and if historical if that history should be read in a purely journalistic sense or with a bit more nuance than that; the text can be mythological--i.e. telling a story with meaning. The credibility of a text isn't that every detail has to have happened in literal history, but rather if this is God's word for us, what is it that He's telling us as the people of God and how can we reflect that in how we believe and in how we live?

I'm only asking for your take on what to believe in OT. I'm not asking you to prove or justify anything. Surely it's not such a hard question to answer for a Christian?

Not hard at all.

However you are going to have to expand your mind a little bit to hear ideas that don't reflect the strict, wooden literalism of modern Protestant Fundamentalism and recognize that these are just as much part of mainstream and traditional Christian thought.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[goodwithoutgod]

Thanks to all who posted


What I've found out so far from your replies are that there are so many different beliefs within Christianity itself, you get different answers depending on who you ask.

It seems though, as Christianity as a whole, the general sentiment is that it doesn't matter very much how you interpret OT, as long as you get to the conclusion that Jesus is your Saviour. No one will ever get 100% accurate interpretation of the original documents, and people will debate and dispute over how to interpret the text till the end of time.

Well, I think I finally got the answer to my question, so good work guys, thanks for your input.

Message for all Christians in this forum...

There's no need to be defensive when a non-believer ask you a question. You don't need to "counterattack," we're just asking a question. All you need to do is explain your view. We're not here to "get you."

And remember, quoting a verse from the bible is useless when talking to a non-believer. It doesn't mean anything because non-believers don't believe in the bible itself. Many Christians (especially street preachers) forget this most important point. For non-believers, "Jesus died for your sins and you need to accept him as your Saviour" sounds as convincing as "You need to take this medication or a three-headed monster will eat you up."

Finally, I understand that you have so much to tell, but when someone asks you a question, please, please do not deviate from the question. In this thread I asked for your take on OT and I was given information on how to get to heaven, which has nothing to do with my question. All information is welcome, as long as it is closely related to the question.

Cheers.

 

[razeontherock]

So you literally believe that there were two people that started the human race, but you conclude that a talking snake is a metaphor, rather than a literal fact. Why?

Is it because a talking snake competes with your idea of "what's plausible", based on your experience and knowledge? If you're not familiar with the term "cognitive dissonance", I urge you to look it up.

The poster you're asking had already given you not only his answer, but a VERY good answer at that! Namely, what the test says. Why did you choose to overlook that?

The nub of my question is, if you think old testament is NOT a "collection of undeniable, undisputed facts" (i.e. some are facts, some are metaphors/symbols/myths), then where's the integrity of the literature and the reason for believing in any of it?

The "integrity of the literature" is in the fact that it encompasses nearly every literary style known to man, over a huge expanse of time, via a wide array of authors. And it still comes up with a cohesive whole, that indeed paints a picture far larger than ANY of the authors were aware of. And the gist of it was covered in the first few chapters With the meaning hidden for 1,000's of years until the Apostle Paul, who never knew Jesus during His mortal lifetime, had to be the one to spell it out for the rest of us.

That's a mouthful of info that it might take you many years to unpack ...

 

[razeontherock]

Message for all Christians in this forum...

but when someone asks you a question, please, please do not deviate from the question.

What you seem unwilling to accept, is the depth of meaning being presented in the very Scriptures you say you want to understand. Normally you will need to learn MANY things you are unaware of, before you can comprehend what the text is even driving at.

Then, different people will have a different take on any given topic, because the words of the text can not express what it is really driving at, since that is Spiritual. We will all have our own experiences, insights, and resulting POV. This is HEALTHY! The result is we need one another, and together we are woven into a tapestry, so to speak. This is God's Way.

May God grant you Peace as you continue seeking

 

[aiki]

Thanks to all who posted


What I've found out so far from your replies are that there are so many different beliefs within Christianity itself, you get different answers depending on who you ask.

Why do you assume those who have posted on this thread are necessarily indicative of Christianity as a whole? I think you make a mistake when you make this assumption.

It seems though, as Christianity as a whole, the general sentiment is that it doesn't matter very much how you interpret OT, as long as you get to the conclusion that Jesus is your Saviour.

This is the sort of skewed conclusion you'll come to if you try to observe Christianity as a whole through the lens of this forum. In fact, as one who has lived all his life in the evangelical Christian community, accurate Bible interpretation is a paramount concern. None of the leading figures in evangelical Christianity that I know of would agree at all with the statement you make above.

No one will ever get 100% accurate interpretation of the original documents, and people will debate and dispute over how to interpret the text till the end of time.

Probably. But the core doctrines and theology of the Bible are not generally in dispute in mainstream Christianity.

Well, I think I finally got the answer to my question, so good work guys, thanks for your input.

If the things you have expressed constitute your "answer," then you've got the wrong end of the stick entirely.

Message for all Christians in this forum...

There's no need to be defensive when a non-believer ask you a question. You don't need to "counterattack," we're just asking a question. All you need to do is explain your view. We're not here to "get you."

LOL! This might be true for you, but it is definitely not true of all who come to this forum to "explore Christianity." In fact, in the years I've been posting here, people with genuine interest in learning more about the Christian faith are very rare indeed. Mostly, I've encountered atheists with an axe to grind and/or a big chip on their shoulder. You can see, then, perhaps, why some of us brace for an attack when questions are asked.

And remember, quoting a verse from the bible is useless when talking to a non-believer. It doesn't mean anything because non-believers don't believe in the bible itself.

Well, if you're going to explore Christianity, the content of the Bible is going to come up. This seems...inevitable to me.

Many Christians (especially street preachers) forget this most important point. For non-believers, "Jesus died for your sins and you need to accept him as your Saviour" sounds as convincing as "You need to take this medication or a three-headed monster will eat you up."

Not to everybody. There have been people who have embraced Christianity through the witness of street preachers. I don't know that this is the best way to go about sharing the faith, but it isn't completely ineffective.

God in His Word makes claims and promises to us about the power and efficacy of His Word to change hearts and minds. As well, Christians are convinced that the Bible reveals truth. For these reasons (among others) Christians are quick to cite Scripture in speaking of their faith. Not speaking of it simply because it isn't something you believe is true implicitly gives authority to the idea that God's truth is less true for the non-believer. But no Christian believes that. In fact, God's truth is true regardless of a person's doubt about it. A non-believer may dismiss God's truth, but this dismissal doesn't somehow make Scripture false.

Finally, I understand that you have so much to tell, but when someone asks you a question, please, please do not deviate from the question. In this thread I asked for your take on OT and I was given information on how to get to heaven, which has nothing to do with my question. All information is welcome, as long as it is closely related to the question.

I think some Christians want to remind you that the most important question you can ask is the one about how to be saved. They think it is so important that they will answer this question even when you haven't asked it! It's a Christian thing, I guess. They mean well.

Selah

 

[bling]

Thanks to all who posted


What I've found out so far from your replies are that there are so many different beliefs within Christianity itself, you get different answers depending on who you ask.

It seems though, as Christianity as a whole, the general sentiment is that it doesn't matter very much how you interpret OT, as long as you get to the conclusion that Jesus is your Saviour. No one will ever get 100% accurate interpretation of the original documents, and people will debate and dispute over how to interpret the text till the end of time.

Well, I think I finally got the answer to my question, so good work guys, thanks for your input.

I have heard people call the whole Bible "The Book of the Lamb" which i agree with. I do hope you read my post 8, because i did try to give you some brief responces to some very deep questions.

Please stick with Alpha and continue to seek answers, but remember most Christians are not seeking answers to the questions you have so you will have to study together. The Bible allows you to go on quests for adventure in studying and learning. You are to find your own answers that you can defend and not just be handed other people's answers.

 

[bsd31]

They didn't answer my question because they didn't understand the question. They went on telling me all different things that I didn't ask about, and after going round and round I gave up.

Probably because the person who asks the questions doesn't get the privileged of dictating the nature of the responses. If you tried to control how people answered your questions (like you've done in this thread) then you'll get nowhere.

What I meant by "cherry picking" also includes "interpreting the meaning of the script as you see fit," and that's the whole point of this question.

One passage can be interpreted in many different ways. On of my favorite examples comes from Job 38:8-11 when God is rebuking Job. He's talking about how he can control the seas. In verse 11 God asks Job "Where were you (v4)

when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt’?

Is it talking about the physical boundaries of the seas? Is it talking about a metaphysical boundary that God has set in place to keep Satan and the other fallen angels away from the saints? Is it talking about the boundary of human effort?

Those are all plausible interpretation and there are probably many more I've never heard of. My personal experience was this; One day I was near the ocean sitting on some rocks. I was going through some frustrations at that time in my life and God brought Job 38:11 to mind. And as soon as He did that I was at peace. So you tell me how should one interpret a scripture? Literal physical meaning? Literal metaphysical meaning?

So you literally believe that there were two people that started the human race, but you conclude that a talking snake is a metaphor, rather than a literal fact. Why?

Well yeah... It's been a while since I took biology but the human machine doesn't divide cells to reproduce off spring. We can't mate with another species to create off spring. So that doesn't leave me with much of an option...

I never said that the talking snake is a metaphor. I gave you the literal meaning of the word used as serpent in that portion of scripture. You have chosen to stick with the word serpent as understood and defined in modern culture. While the image and symbolism of a lizard tempting humans to sin is an interesting one it is not a sound Biblical teaching.

Is it because a talking snake competes with your idea of "what's plausible", based on your experience and knowledge? If you're not familiar with the term "cognitive dissonance", I urge you to look it up.

I am familiar and it has absolutely zero to do with the topic of discussion.

The nub of my question is, if you think old testament is NOT a "collection of undeniable, undisputed facts" (i.e. some are facts, some are metaphors/symbols/myths), then where's the integrity of the literature and the reason for believing in any of it?

I think several people have already explained this to you and a lot better than I can. I'll just say, again, that we can look at scriptures from both a literal physical and a literal metaphysical/spiritual point of view.