• 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.

Search results

  1. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    Again. The Bible is not a science textbook. Genesis describes ancient Israelite cosmology, not modern science. Moses isn't Francis Collins.
  2. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    That’s true, what matters most is what Paul actually meant. But to determine that, we need to carefully consider Paul’s use of language, his theological aims, and the literary and cultural context he was writing within. Paul regularly draws on typology and representation (like Adam and Christ...
  3. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    :smirk: you obviously have concerns about a non-literal Adam. Again, there is a deeper assumption here. I agree that Jesus and the cross are historical realities essential to Christian faith, but not every theological truth in Scripture requires the same kind of historical grounding. Parables...
  4. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    I understand your concern: you believe that if Adam isn't a literal, historical individual, then Paul's argument in Romans 5 falls apart. But that concern assumes Paul is making a biological or historical one-to-one comparison between Adam and Christ. That’s not actually required by the text...
  5. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    The question we're exploring is how that truth is conveyed. Does it require Adam to be a literal, historical individual in a modern genealogical sense? Or can Paul be using Adam as a representative figure—an archetype—through whom the universal human condition is expressed? The reality of sin...
  6. Job 33:6

    6,000 Years?

    I don't think Moses would have had "humanoids" in mind. Rather, it would just be mankind. But that's one option of many views that are out there. These topics have been debated for centuries in the church and several are compatible with a non-literal adam.
  7. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    Well, Genesis could be written in a modern scientific context for starters. Not an ancient isrealite context. Genesis describes ancient Israelite cosmology, not modern science. The Catholic Church messed this up centuries ago with Galileo and people still haven't figured this one out.
  8. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    You're right that Paul uses the structure “just as… so also” to highlight the relationship between Adam’s trespass and Christ’s act of righteousness. But I’d like to offer a perspective that maintains the full weight of that theological truth, even if one doesn’t insist on a historical Adam in...
  9. Job 33:6

    6,000 Years?

    I don't think it's necessary to have a literal Adam to hold to a theology about people having souls. How do you even know that your soul was created when Adams soul was created, rather than your soul being created when you were born? Saint Augustine's view was that each soul is created...
  10. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    Also, Romans 5 definitely draws a parallel between Adam and Christ. But your conclusion assumes that imputation only works if Adam is a specific historical individual. That’s not required by the text. The key idea in Romans 5 is representation, not biology. Adam functions as a theological...
  11. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    Distinction doesn’t weaken the point being made: both are non-literal forms of communication used in Scripture to convey truth. Neither parables nor symbols require historical facticity to be theologically powerful or effective. So when we say something may be symbolic (e.g., the figure of Adam...
  12. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    Was the parable of the rich man and Lazarus also literally true? No? Well I guess that's a waste of a story too then. Romans 5 definitely draws a parallel between Adam and Christ. But your conclusion assumes that imputation only works if Adam is a specific historical individual. That’s not...
  13. Job 33:6

    6,000 Years?

    This is a concordist hermeneutic approach. Many would disagree. The imago dei isn't even mentioned when God breathes into Adams nostrils. Nor is Adam being created even mentioned in chapter 1. There is nothing in the text about "mental complexity" being an aspect of the imago dei, as if mentally...
  14. Job 33:6

    6,000 Years?

    That's fine. I'm not really concerned by more nuanced analysis or emphasis in certain areas of scripture. As long as it doesn't involve the big bang theory and catastrophic plate tectonics, I'm good.
  15. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    Ok. That's your personal opinion, again. I could say that my position is the only biblical option, and that yours is a disservice to the Bible. But that would be hermeneutically lazy and dishonest.
  16. Job 33:6

    6,000 Years?

    Sure. You're welcome to share why you think a literal Adam is necessary to keep the Bible robust, if you would like to.
  17. Job 33:6

    Why believing in a literal Adam and Eve matters

    This is your opinion. It isn't actually evident in the text. Nothing wrong with an opinion, but you should be aware that this is what it is. Some people have the opinion that Eve was literally made out of a rib bone too. You're free to believe what you want. But you should know that there are...
  18. Job 33:6

    6,000 Years?

    Sure. Are you pointing towards topography of these other texts, like the primordial mound? Or what did you have in mind?
  19. Job 33:6

    6,000 Years?

    @Platte And yes, I would otherwise agree with the silver star idea. Even though it's a small detail that I would disagree with, the idea you're sharing is a lot better than the entire planet earth appearing out of nothing, inside the ocean. Or whatever weird ideas are floating around out there.
  20. Job 33:6

    6,000 Years?

    I don't mind. I just don't think this is the intended focus. Just like with Moses crossing the red sea and the waters being gathered. I don't think it's about topography. I think it's intended to describe a supernatural deliverance. God restraining the waters. Like Jesus calming the sea and...
Top Bottom