@Alice_Linsley… have you read the article? Do you need a copy of it? Your comments don’t appear to engage the assertions of the writer.
1 Like
I have skimmed the article and I hope to have more time to read it all. There is much of value in Clouser’s paper. He is correct that clergy are poorly informed about Genesis and human origins. He is right that Genesis does not need to be harmonized with science, although there is science there, of an archaic nature, which can be understood when we place the material in the proper cultural contexts.
Genesis does portray humans as religious beings, but that is not the main thrust. It is about the origins of Messianic expectation.
Clouser argues about material that isn’t read much today. Henry Morris is an example. We are still fighting battles with Young Earth Creationists, a rapidly shrinking lot. I doubt there will be any YEC’s within 20 years.
I have addressed much of what Clouser considers: the question of Adam and Eve as metahistorical first parents of peoples in the R1b Haplogroup; the royal menagerie of the Proto-Saharan ruler Noah; and the extent of flooding in the time of Noah.
Clouser seems quick to set aside Augustine, yet Augustine was not a literalist when it came to the days of creation. I wish he had explored the Eastern doctrine of ancestral sin (amartema), which in Orthodoxy refers to an individual act. The Eastern Fathers assigned full responsibility for the sin of disobedience to Adam and Eve. In this they were generous, since the one who first disobeyed was Eve, a point that is especially pertinent to the Messianic theme. Unlike the Western Church, so strongly influenced by Augustine and Calvin, the Eastern Church never speaks of guilt being passed from Adam and Eve to their progeny. Instead, each person bears the guilt of his or her own sin. It is not guilt that is passed on, it is a condition, like a disease. Theophilus of Antioch (2nd Century) held that Adam and Eve were created neither immortal nor mortal. They were created with the potential to become either. This teleological potential (like Aristotle’s proverbial acorn) was misdirected and distorted.
1 Like
I think you say that the pain in childbirth was increased because of the apple, do you think it has decreased following the death of Jesus? A little, a lot, for believers or for all peoples?
Farming? i don’t think Abraham was a farmer. The curse of physical death . . .has a clearly understood meaning to everyone.“spiritual” death? what does that mean? So you would offer an unclear analogy to substitute for a literal interpretation? hmm seems like a slippery slope. But does the tree still exist? and is there an angel guarding it with a fiery sword?
again the story is hard to accept literally.
At that time Greek tragedy had plots like this, some small misstep crosses an irascible god, or an implacable social norm, and a great tragedy falls on the unwitting, but overly confident hero. Mercy might be found from one god taking your side against another. Adam and Eve got crossways with god over an apple. and brought infinite vengance on the human race? sounds like a greek tragedy. Not like the God of Abraham or David, or Jesus.
“extreme?” physical death is for ever for everyone. that is extreme. if there is to be hope, it must be in a merciful god. tragedy is hopeless.
finally, “God is what is” means god does not answer to human questioning.
If we are made “in the image and likeness of God” a little more definition is reasonable. I suggest that Jesus would say 7 x 70 for mercy, and there is hope.
And i don’t let go easily. People must take their stand in the world, and should be advised by wisdom and conscience. But no ducking. will it be mercy or vengence? thumbs up or thumbs down?
then lets talk about evolution
Christians who favor Evolution might disagree. Evolution is flawed; we all know this. And Humanity as presented in Genesis is also flawed; we all know this.
I find Evolution and Genesis to be of the same fold of cloth.
Here is a great quote:
“…because of Adam’s failure,
humans were left in their mortal condition and
“death continued to rule … even over those who had
not sinned the way Adam did.” The parallel to this is,
of course, that Christ succeeded in precisely the way
Adam had failed: “For as by one man’s disobedience
many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one
man shall many be made righteous” (Rom. 5:19).”
“This is a momentous shift in understanding the role
of Adam and Eve in salvation history. So, if this one
line in Romans 5:13 were the only place where the
New Testament referred to humans prior to Adam
and Eve, we might well hesitate to overturn the
traditional Augustinian view.”
" But it is not the only place Paul refers to people whom God did not hold
accountable for their sin because they lived before
God revealed his law. Speaking to the Zeus worshippers
at Lystra, Paul says of God that he “in the
generations past allowed all the nations to go their
own way” (Acts 14:16), and in his speech before the
Epicurean and Stoic philosophers in Athens, he again
refers to an era in which the worship of false gods
was not held against humans, saying that “the times
of this ignorance God overlooked, but now declares
to all humans everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30)."
1 Like
Increased because of knowledge changing the fit of humans in the world, sure. And inasmuch as followers of Jesus have ministered to the sick and poor to relieve their pain, you could say it has decreased now in the world, I suppose.
Abraham had livestock, he was a herder (or the leader of a tribe of herders). If we divide people into hunter-gatherers and agricultural people, he clearly falls into the agricultural camp. Whether domestic animals or domestic plants are the focus is not the point.
Like I said before, though, I’m not Christian. I don’t see the point of eternal life or why it is so sought after. For example, would a soul change over eternity? Is Heaven stagnant or dynamic? If dynamic, wouldn’t you eventually become unrecognizable over the course of infinity? And if eventually you are no longer you, then why was it so necessary for ‘you’ to be preserved in the first place?
I don’t think my views on this are particularly relevant to this site, but since you wanted me to clarify why I rejected your binary, there it is.
George,
You wrote, “I find Evolution and Genesis to be of the same fold of cloth.”
I understand that. It raises suspicion that you read the text through a preconceived evolutionary lens. This is no different than reading through the lens of Young Earth Creationism, in my opinion. As scientists, we should be more concerned with the data in Genesis and whether or not it aligns with findings in the various sciences. We do that best when we first identify the cultural context of the material. This is the work of BIblical Anthropology, a scientific approach to the text,
1 Like
Yep… @Alice_Linsley…
Only Evolution and an Old Earth can explain the pattern of fossil finds … and the pattern of mammalian taxonomy that we find in Australia.
I admire your commitment to no ducking. I just had a few further thoughts to bring up:
The thing is though, that the literal interpretation is problematic. God tells Adam that on the day that he eats from the tree he will die. I see only three options, essentially. One: God does not mean a literal 24-hour day, he means 900-plus years. Two: God does not mean literal, physical death. ‘Death’ has a more complicated meaning. Three: God was flat-out not being truthful.
You have correctly surmised which of these options I find most worthy of pursuing. I am curious which of them you believe to be the most “literal interpretation?”
1 Like
If we are speaking of human origins, we must look to Africa, not Australia.
But before we decide where to look, we need to have consensus about how long it took. Australia is part of the proof that life has been around for much more than 5000 years … and that life did not promulgate across all the continents in just five eons.
Would you agree, @Alice_Linsley ?
i always understood it to mean that Adam would die as a result of this new knowledge, that he was naked., like a cancer had been planted in him that would cause his death,part of the punishment was waiting for death to come… that except for the apple he might have expected to live “forever”. Which as a story matches the ability of Santa Claus to visit every house, even those without chimneys on christmas eve, but it was in that magical world, not literal, not actually factual. If someone said apples don’t grow in that climate, it doesnt spoil the story. The point is, there are little things that indicate it is a fairy tale, like the talking serpent, and the eternal fate of human kind being cursed because two innocents had a piece of an apple. There is a higher level piece that God - of David- could not pursue vengence forever, or curse children for a parents sin generation past generation without end. that is a cartoon god, not a serious contender for the creator of the world. Such that the story is interesting, warns us to be careful, do as we are told, but it is in no way historical. so if investigations show a different time frame to human development, the story of Adam and Eve has no business appearing in the discussion. whether it is geology or biology.
i am also disenchanted with heaven, no booze, no coffee, no sex. choir practice everyday. maybe spirtual death gets you out of the torture of hell, and choir practice. i suspect nothing brings back sex.
not a christian, eh? you seem to be trying to make sense of it, and have a soft spot for compassion. or your just not impressed with the institutions? Neither was Jesus impressed with the church leaders of his day. said they were corrupt, hypocrites, sound like some churches today? the point is let honest inquiry continue. illegitimi non carborundum
Particularly since nowhere does it ever even say it’s an apple. Genesis just calls it ‘fruit.’
Thanks for clarifying your position though!
i come to this discourse to sort out some ideas." position" is how a political candidate plans to implement street parking policies. My position is that it should make some kind of sense, with some kind of consistency, “literal” accuracy is contractual language. we expect poetic license in story tellers and political candidates. fine details - like tithing comes out of Abraham giving 10% to Malkisadec, of the spoils of a war campaign. it is not a basis for taxation. sorry, going off subject. back to evolution.
1 Like
It seems to me like a pretty enormous commitment just to study and follow the teachings of Jesus, even without addressing whether I could wrap my logic-minded self around, say, the doctrine of the Trinity, or of the immortal soul, and whether I would still count as Christian if I couldn’t. 
As a pantheist I do believe there is significant truth in every religion, even if it requires some work to excavate. Actually, come to think of it, I don’t think there’s any religion which doesn’t require you to work at uncovering the deeper meanings of things. That’s sort of the whole point of deeper meanings, I guess. We would never appreciate them if they came free. 
…and you especially believe [probably unquestioningly] in whatever religion it is that is guiding you in this whole excavation project. That’s where the epistemological rubber gets traction on the road for you. 
I think you’re spot on that uncovering more and deeper truth takes work, and that there is truth to be found in every religion. Amen to all that!
…Honestly trying to figure out what, if anything, you’re trying to imply? I’m religiously unaffiliated. If you’re saying I’m being atheistically guided or not questioning enough, I’m not sure what basis you have for that…if you’re trying to say something else entirely, clarify?
But thanks for the second part of your comment! 
That is just my reaction to those who might think of themselves as unaffiliated with anything in regard to their axiomatic presuppositions or worldview. I.e. as having the objective standard or platform (be it Science, Rationality, or whatever other things inevitably rush in to fill any vacuum). IOW, I’m skeptical about the actual existence of any true atheists, if I may tug on the conventional usage of that label.
I don’t have much basis for thinking that necessarily applies to you, so just consider it my cautionary reminder in case it does, or for other readers here too.
Happy Thanksgiving!
I think the Catholic Church is just getting over the Galileo affair. About 400 years denying gravity, heliocentric, round earth. After recant ing on Galileo, some were thinking NOT to jump in with both feet to fight Darwin. Immediately in that knee-jerk reaction that this too appears a conflict with the bible. Caution