Paul's presents Genesis as literal and not parable.

[-57]

But I don't disagree with the bible on why Christ came and died, nor do I disagree with what the Bible teaches.

YI think you do, for instance why did Christ come and die? We all know for our sins...but why do we sin? That you disagree with what the bible teaches.

 

[Aman777]

It is amazing to me, these Christians who consider a divinely inspired allegory to be of so much less value than a divinely inspired factual account.

Amen. My view is that IF something is God's Truth, then it is the Truth in every way...and that includes literally, factually, and provably. Faith is the Gift of God to believe that Jesus was raised from the dead...literally. Eph 2:8 God Bless you

 

[Speedwell]

If Genesis isn't a literal historical account..then the way the bible presents it is wrong. Over a little while I have provided several verses that show Genesis and the account of Adam and Eve are literal and historical.

I know you believe that the verses you quote do that--but they don't. All they show is that Paul probably thought the stories were historical in some sense. The do not show that the texts of the Genesis stories are 100% accurate literal history as you claim.

 

[Archivist]

YI think you do, for instance why did Christ come and die? We all know for our sins...but why do we sin? That you disagree with what the bible teaches.

But I don't disagree with what the Bible teaches. I do disagree with your interpretation.

 

[Aman777]

I know you believe that the verses you quote do that--but they don't. All they show is that Paul probably thought the stories were historical in some sense. The do not show that the texts of the Genesis stories are 100% accurate literal history as you claim.

IF Adam was not a literal man, then today's people would still be looking for a hole to sleep in tonight. Gen 3:22 ONLY Adam was made with a mind like God's which means that ONLY a literal Adam could have passed his superior intelligence to Noah.

When Noah arrived in the mountains of Ararat, his unborn grandsons, also arrived. Like Cain, on Adam's Earth, they had NO other Humans (descendants of Adam) to marry. Like Cain, they married and produced offspring with the sons of God (prehistoric people) of Adam's Earth AND on the present Earth, fulfilling the prophecy of Gen 6:4 of "and also after that". IOW, Only the descendants of Adam have INHERITED his intelligence since Nature does NOT evolve it. Amen?

 

[Speedwell]

IF Adam was not a literal man, then today's people would still be looking for a hole to sleep in tonight. Gen 3:22 ONLY Adam was made with a mind like God's which means that ONLY a literal Adam could have passed his superior intelligence to Noah.

When Noah arrived in the mountains of Ararat, his unborn grandsons, also arrived. Like Cain, on Adam's Earth, they had NO other Humans (descendants of Adam) to marry. Like Cain, they married and produced offspring with the sons of God (prehistoric people) of Adam's Earth AND on the present Earth, fulfilling the prophecy of Gen 6:4 of "and also after that". IOW, Only the descendants of Adam have INHERITED his intelligence since Nature does NOT evolve it. Amen?

Amen? I have no idea what you're talking about. What "prehistoric people?" I thought the whole point of creationism was that there where no "prehistoric people."

 

[Aman777]

YI think you do, for instance why did Christ come and die? We all know for our sins...but why do we sin? That you disagree with what the bible teaches.

Christ died for Adam's (mankind's) sins. Adam was formed of the dust on the 3rd Day before the plants herbs and rain by the Hands of Jesus (Lord God). Jesus died for His own creation, His own child, showing the Father's love for His children.

 

[-57]

I know you believe that the verses you quote do that--but they don't. All they show is that Paul probably thought the stories were historical in some sense. The do not show that the texts of the Genesis stories are 100% accurate literal history as you claim.

You seem to be coming to your senses by adding "in some sense" to what Paul believed.

Tell us, just who was Adam? You can't even do that and stay true to the bible.

 

[-57]

But I don't disagree with what the Bible teaches. I do disagree with your interpretation.

Rather than a denial..I've been waiting for you're explanation. Why do you continue to avoid the questions?

 

[Archivist]

Rather than a denial..I've been waiting for you're explanation. Why do you continue to avoid the questions?

I have not avoided any questions.

 

[-57]

I have not avoided any questions.

I you haven't, then can you please respond again and tell us why we sin? When and how we received a sin nature?

...I think you agree that we have one. Tell us about the history of it. The bible tells us, you considerl it an allegorical account...OK, what really happened?

 

[Archivist]

I you haven't, then can you please respond again and tell us why we sin? When and how we received a sin nature?

...I think you agree that we have one. Tell us about the history of it. The bible tells us, you considerl it an allegorical account...OK, what really happened?

Here is the answer I provided back in post 154:

"As I have said before...sin entered the world. Exactly how that happened is irrelevant."

Probably worth adding that it most certainly didn't happen because a talking snake persuaded a women to eat a piece of fruit.

 

[Aman777]

Amen? I have no idea what you're talking about. What "prehistoric people?" I thought the whole point of creationism was that there where no "prehistoric people."

That's the view/religion/belief of ancient theologians. It is NOT what Genesis actually says. Gen 1:21 shows that "every living creature that moveth" was created and brought forth from water on the 5th Day. Prehistoric mankind moved, which means that the bones we find from Millions of years ago up to the present time, are real.

There were some one million sons of God on planet Earth when Noah arrived, but they were NOT Human (descendants of Adam). They descended from Apes but did not have the superior intelligence of Adam, which was like God's. Gen 3:22

The sons of God were also able to produce offspring with Adam's descendants. Gen 6:4 shows that the offspring of Humans and prehistoric people had also inherited Adam's superior intelligence. It's the ONLY way to be Human. In about 10k years Humans (descendants of Adam) have gone from 8 to some 7 Billion Humans alive on planet Earth TODAY. God's plan is working perfectly and continues to fill the 3rd Heaven with born again Spiritually alive Christians. God Bless you

 

[Speedwell]

You seem to be coming to your senses by adding "in some sense" to what Paul believed.

Tell us, just who was Adam? You can't even do that and stay true to the bible.

In the twenty years and more we have been arguing about this "in some sense" has always been part of it. There is more than one way to write an historical narrative and the way you insist that Genesis is written wasn't even invented by historians until a couple of hundred years ago.

Adam was the first man. How is that not true to the Bible?

 

[-57]

In the twenty years and more we have been arguing about this "in some sense" has always been part of it. There is more than one way to write an historical narrative and the way you insist that Genesis is written wasn't even invented by historians until a couple of hundred years ago.

Adam was the first man. How is that not true to the Bible?

Adam was the first man. That's what the bible teaches. Eve was the first women, that too is what the bible teaches.

The bible teaches Adam was formed from the dust then Eve from his rib...do you disagree? If so, how did Adam and Eve come to be?

 

[Speedwell]

Adam was the first man. That's what the bible teaches. Eve was the first women, that too is what the bible teaches.

The bible teaches Adam was formed from the dust then Eve from his rib...do you disagree? If so, how did Adam and Eve come to be?

I have no idea--and neither did the author(s) of the Garden story, which is why it was written as an etiology.

 

[-57]

I have no idea--and neither did the author(s) of the Garden story, which is why it was written as an etiology.

Translation...God doesn't have the ability to tell us what happened. Why and when we fell....so they had to make up a so-so story.

Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’

Jesus was simply passing off your so-so etiology as what? Something that sounds good rather than the truth when Jesus was quoting Gen 5:2 He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them Man in the day when they were created.

Jesus was saying "7‘ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,"....based upon a so-so story you consider as an etiology???

 

[SolomonVII]

Adam was the first man. That's what the bible teaches. Eve was the first women, that too is what the bible teaches.

The bible teaches Adam was formed from the dust then Eve from his rib...do you disagree? If so, how did Adam and Eve come to be?

Person "A" offers the understanding that Adam and Eve were shaped from the dust with a method similar to an artist making a sculture.
Person "B" offers the understanding that people came into being through a metamorphosis of similar life forms in a genetic interplay with their environment.
Now lets us assume that both Person "A" and Person "B" both have come to an understanding that the Book of Genesis is a literary work inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Is there any theological lesson or insight that Person "A" would have as to the spiritual or moral or ethical lessons to be derived by reading Genesis that Person "B" would be bereft of?

If two different theologies are derived from the different understandings of Adam and Eve, then the differences between A and B are substantive. If the theologies derived are the same, then the disagreements are moot.

 

[Archivist]

Person "A" offers the understanding that Adam and Eve were shaped from the dust with a method similar to an artist making a sculture.
Person "B" offers the understanding that people came into being through a metamorphosis of similar life forms in a genetic interplay with their environment.
Now lets us assume that both Person "A" and Person "B" both have come to an understanding that the Book of Genesis is a literary work inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Is there any theological lesson or insight that Person "A" would have as to the spiritual or moral or ethical lessons to be derived by reading Genesis that Person "B" would be bereft of?

If two different theologies are derived from the different understandings of Adam and Eve, then the differences between A and B are substantive. If the theologies derived are the same, then the disagreements are moot.

Very well said.

Sad that some in this thread believe that those who disagree with their interpretation of the Genesis creation account should just "toss [their] bible into the trash."

 

[-57]

Person "A" offers the understanding that Adam and Eve were shaped from the dust with a method similar to an artist making a sculture.
Person "B" offers the understanding that people came into being through a metamorphosis of similar life forms in a genetic interplay with their environment.
Now lets us assume that both Person "A" and Person "B" both have come to an understanding that the Book of Genesis is a literary work inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Is there any theological lesson or insight that Person "A" would have as to the spiritual or moral or ethical lessons to be derived by reading Genesis that Person "B" would be bereft of?

If two different theologies are derived from the different understandings of Adam and Eve, then the differences between A and B are substantive. If the theologies derived are the same, then the disagreements are moot.

The disagreements are not moot. Concerning any theological lesson or insight as well as any moral or ethical lessons....those that are persuaded by "B" skip over why we sin and deviate from what scripture teaches.
They simply say, well were sinners and that's all I need to know. But when asked how we got that way....I hear silence. They exchange what is written in the Word of God for the word of man...the reason for Jesus coming and dieing on the cross isn't because of a single act of disobedience where we all suffer the reprocussion and curse of that sin.