The discussion on Adam and Eve being the first humans (or not)

Faith & Science Conversation
41

That’s a complete non sequitur, even by your own reasoning: you often claim that Moses got his information by revelation. What this indicates is that you grab whatever version of things supports your argument at the time, which makes you very inconsistent.

That statement comes from a MSWV.

Um, what?!? Ussher is hardly “the standard” among any scholars of the OT. – he’s just a popular one because his work supports something people want to believe.
And it should be noted that Ussher himself recognized that there are different copies of the Torah with differing numbers of years between events!

1 Like
42

This is most certainly true.

Which YEC refuses to do.

Which is an idea that can’t be found in the Bible! And “science” here includes history.
The ANE concept of truth didn’t rest on human observation, which is what constitutes science, but on the authority of the source. In the case of the OT, that source was/is considered to be YHWH-Elohim, which makes the accounts true regardless of scientific or historical accuracy.

Or as though it intends to teach any science or in any way conform to modern science.

That’s a very good point. The closest anything comes to being “taught by the Bible” would be the fact that Genesis 1 and 2 have different Creation accounts so Genesis 1 could indicate that God made other humans first – but the text doesn’t quite affirm that, it’s just a deduction from there being two Creation accounts.

It’s worth taking the advice of an ancient Christian to a non-believing friend for approaching the scriptures: abandon all you hold true, and hear the message written!

That’s certainly a possibility.

Not really historical narrative, it’s mythologized history: events embellished and told from a certain perspective to make a point.

My favorite example is the Tower of Babel story for the reason that there is a city with an unfinished tower that matches all the events in the Genesis version, just not in the same order, making it clearly (assuming that correspondence is actual) an attempt to tell the event from Yahweh’s perspective.

Interesting!

1 Like
43

The problem is that you conflate original sin with the biblical theme that humans are sinful and corrupt.

What’s abominable is that you read it so shallowly that you actually think that the above statement makes sense when it actually shows a very limited view of God.

Paul didn’t write any verses on original sin. He wrote that all have sinned, echoing the prophets who said that no one does good.

Where do you even get these bizarre ideas? “Professing Christians” aren’t corrupt? Show me that in an apostolic writing!

Not in any dogmatics I’ve ever read. Where did you get this one?

You have a very shallow and binary way of looking at things that leads to some very odd conclusions.

1 Like
44

So if we are not corrupt from Original Sinn the God made us corrupt. Brilliant.

So being a Christian is a waste of effort. Christ died for nothing because knowing our sins are forgiven just makes us happy to sin.

The whole idea of Christianity is that we turn ourselves around with God’s help.

Paul says that we are no lonnger slaves to sin, so ? Why are we stil corrupt?

(NB< I am using your arguments against you not proclaiming mine)

What ia repentance then?

We repent and are forgiven, that means that we admit it was wrong and vow never to do it again.

If we do not repent, we cannot be forgiven. That is Christian Dogma
(It is not what i have been aguing though. I claim no such criteria for forgiveness)

Get your facts straight. Or do you not understand the doctrine of repentance?

Richard

45

I think you better check your theology? Scripyures very clear.

46

I thiink you need to be a little bit more specific.
(Try quoting what you think is wrong)

Richard

47

I sometimes think you’ve never opened a Bible – that is so far from what scripture teaches it may as well be from the Quran.

Ditto the above, except now it’s Gnosticism.

No – the whole idea is that God turns us around because we cannot do it – Paul says we were “dead in trespasses and sins”, and dead people don’t need help, they need a new birth.

Because we are still in this flesh, which Paul calls sinful flesh.

Based on the Hebrew and Greek, repentance is “turning around” and “change of heart/mind”.

The first part is what Peter proclaimed on Pentecost; the third clause is debatable.

If we are not forgiven, we cannot repent – if we do not repent, forgiveness is worthless.

Not as you expressed it – God’s ability is not dependent on our action. But as with Jesus in Nazareth, He will do not mighty work in the face of our unbelief.

Apparently you deny that doctrine despite Paul and Peter teaching it (along with Isaiah and others) – or you are playing semantic games.

1 Like
48

You still do not understand. I am using your interpretaions not mine.

But , as usual, you fail to understand your own doctrines and claim that i am lying.

But, conveneintly you do not try and show how you get to your beleifs, you just ridicule what I say.

I asked before and I will ask again. If the corruption didn;t come from Adam, where did it come from?

Explain yourself instead of just criticising me.

Put your beleifs on the table.

Show it to me. Show me what Scriptures you are hanging your beleifs on.

I cannot argue against what you refuse to show.

Richard

49

I have shown the scriptures – you rejected them as Paul’s opinions and or as Jewish or “ungodly” without giving any reasons other than those subjective biases of yours.

And then you just twist what the scriptures say with binary logic, so I see no reason to play your games any longer.

50

No, you just claim I ignore them.

You do not quote lie @adamjedgar does.At east he shows why he beleives what he does and doesn’t mind repeating himself ad nauseum if necessary.

Oh dear I do not beleive that Scriptures were written by the Holy Spirit! Didums. Scripture does not claim it.

Richard

51

2 Timothy 3:16-17, 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thouroughly equipped for every good work.

52

Does not say that the Holy Spirit wrote or dictated all of scriptrue.

It states that Sripture is useful, wow!. And inspired?. So if you are moived to write a poem on a daffodil, did the daffodil write it?

Besides, Paul was talking about Hebrew Scrioture. It was a final comment to Timothy along the lines of:

“Don’t forget that Scripture is there as a back up”.

It does not say that Scripture is the only source of knowledge or that he Holy Spirit dictated or wrote it…

This passage has been used and abused by fundmantalist for far too long. It does not mean what you and others claim.
.
Richard

53

Look, whether or not you wish to simply read the writings…there is simply no biblical evidence that sin came from God. the notion of disobedience may be something God explained to Adam and Eve, however, the evidence of revolt came before that time at the hands of Lucifer in heaven.

It is your words that make the claim God created sin…that to me is like saying that a judge can only arraign a murderer if the judge has also murdered someone! Its ridiculous and in all honesty is nothing more than a naturalistic attempt to reconcile evolutionary time with bible history. There is a big difference between knowing and doing!

Your aim there is to support the notion that allowing evil is evil in itself. Given we are not robots, i reject that claim…it denies free will that was clearly given to Adam and Eve in Genesis Chapter 2 (do not eat of the tree in the middle of the garden, in the day you eat of it…). Adam and Eve were not prevented from choosing, and they knew the consequence of choosing badly. This does not make God evil and it certainly does not provide any theological ground from which to make the claim death and suffering existed prior to the fall (and that is pretty obvious in the arraignment of Adam, Eve and the serpent in Genesis 3:8-19.

Actually come to think of it, i find an example of a really interesting change in the historical timeline in the story here…we find this quite often in the bible…the writer, without explanation suddenly jumbles up the order of events…

verse 20 and Adam named his wife Eve…

funny that Adam had already named the animals in Chapter 2 but Eve seemingly remained nameless until after the arraignment when they sinned and just before being kicked out of the garden in the east of Eden!

The writer, after making this out of order advertisement, then returns back to the narrative carrying on from verse 19.

I think one could be convinced to agree with the claim that Genesis 3:20 was not part of the original writings or was moved from its original location in the text. To me it smells of a textual variant or error.

54

Not to be undrstood her. Sin and evil did notcome from God. But God did allow evil on the earth. Man. Adam made that evil known as sin when perpetrated against God.
Why else would God have a plan of salvation conceived before creation and conceived out of love, the very opposite of evil. Look at the archeological and paloeointoliogical record before and even after Ada. Evilness beyond expectations. Adam’s purpose was to bring the kowledge of good and evil to Man. Christ Jesus would pay that price for all of us later.

55

It says scripture is God-breathed, as in breathed by God. God is the ultimate source. There’s very little wiggle room for your heresy here.

1 Like
56

No it does not. And besides it is not perfect enough to be God written.

What you claim is one of the biggest heresies ever created.

And is responsible for the most evil, abhorent doctrines ever created that God would never put His seal upon

Richard

57

Lol, what is anyone to do with you? I quote you a Bible passage that literally says, “All scripture is God-breathed” and you say, “It does not say all scripture is God-breathed!” You either can’t read English or you can read it and simply deny reality and substitute it for one of your own making. It’s ridiculous.

2 Likes
58

Unfortunately, the original Greek can be ambiguous, meaning something like, “all scripture is god-breathed and is useful …” or as “all god-breathed scripture is useful …”. I would not defend that second meaning, but it is not a matter of reading English.

2 Likes
59

You have evolution on the brain – you’re seeing it where it isn’t.

That only works if they knew what death was, which suggests they had seen it.

That requires that God wanted Adam to rebel.

It says exactly that!

It does not say “God written” – don’t equate the two.

60

where do you get that notion/belief from?

Are you repeating what i have already illustrated is just plain wrong? That God is evil because as a creator, he predetermined that he would die for His own creation should they sin? That a judge cannot arraign a murderer unless said judge had also murdered!

How do you construct the idea from that notion, that God would intentionally design a lowly form of life in order to then put Himself into a position of extreme suffering, in order to then save them from themselves?

Why would a highly intelligent being intentionally design and construct something that does not work properly? I mean, I’m made in the image of God, and even if I evolved, there is no way in heck i would design myself knowing what i know…i would design something better that doesnt have the flaws i have. So given your knowledge of the bible, why would God not do the same? (which btw is what i believe he did in Genesis…“it was very good”)

If evil and suffering is what God has predetermined, please explain theologically (using biblical references) your support for the fact that if true, there is absolutely no reason to believe it wouldn’t happen again?

I think that when you start providing bible references supporting the notion that it cannot happen again, the links those texts have back to the old testament creation account are going to discredit your world view of Theistic Evolution…because of the SAbbath (Exodus 20:8-11), Creation and the Fall (Genesis chapters 1,2&3), and genealogies of bible characters from Christs time right back to Adam.

One of these reasons why those links exist is because historically, we can trace almost every single Israelite character with known archaeological evidences that prove the timeline (eg Hezekiah’s tunnels, Jehu bowing before Shalmaneser III on the Black Obelisk, discovery of the ancient Hittites etc)…this historicity provides an internal biblical consistency that prove doctrines associated with sin and salvation!

We need those proofs because human nature demands it…God provides evidence of that in His own nature of which we are a copy (made in the image of), when he asked of Adam and Eve “who told you that you were naked?” “Have you eaten of the tree i warned you not to eat thereof?”