A Literal Adam And Eve?

[seer]

It seems that though Eve is called the mother of all living, and that in Adam all men died, and sin entered the world though one man, that many Christian don't believe in a literal Adam and Eve. How can that be - it would undermine the whole story of sin and redemption.

[Adrift]

It seems that though Eve is called the mother of all living, and that in Adam all men died, and sin entered the world though one man, that many Christian don't believe in a literal Adam and Eve. How can that be - it would undermine the whole story of sin and redemption.

It depends on the view. Theologians and thinkers have theorized all manner of interpretations on the literalness, or lack thereof, of Adam and Eve. So, it'll probably depend on the exact theory you're asking about to see how people get to that particular view, and how it correlates with other doctrines. And not everyone accepts the Augustinian conception of Original Sin, so there's that to contend with as well.

[Cow Poke]

Always go back to the Cross.

[seer]

It depends on the view. Theologians and thinkers have theorized all manner of interpretations on the literalness, or lack thereof, of Adam and Eve. So, it'll probably depend on the exact theory you're asking about to see how people get to that particular view, and how it correlates with other doctrines. And not everyone accepts the Augustinian conception of Original Sin, so there's that to contend with as well.

What about Paul's view of sin - in Adam we all died? And that sin entered the world through one man? Those seem pretty explicit.

[seer]

Always go back to the Cross.

Of course, but Paul ties Christ directly to Adam (the first Adam, Christ the second Adam), that the sin of Adam that infected us all. No sin no need for the cross.

[Cow Poke]

Of course, but Paul ties Christ directly to Adam (the first Adam, Christ the second Adam), that the sin of Adam that infected us all. No sin no need for the cross.

Understood - there are parts of the Bible I don't understand or cannot explain, so I always go back to the cross. That part I get. And I think it's pretty self evident that we are all sinners, regardless of from whence it came.

[seer]

Understood - there are parts of the Bible I don't understand or cannot explain, so I always go back to the cross. That part I get. And I think it's pretty self evident that we are all sinners, regardless of from whence it came.

Except that brings into the question the trustfulness of Scripture. If the Bible is wrong about how sin came into the world perhaps it is wrong about there being sin in the first place. It is evident that we do some horrible things, but calling it sin (a violation of God's law) is a theological claim, a Biblical claim.

[Cow Poke]

Except that brings into the question the trustfulness of Scripture.

Or my understanding of it, or the correct translation of it, or both...

If the Bible is wrong about how sin came into the world perhaps it is wrong about there being sin in the first place. It is evident that we do some horrible things, but calling it sin (a violation of God's law) is a theological claim, a Biblical claim.

The ten commandments are clear what sin is, then Jesus even narrowed it down to "the big 2". He obviously believed there was such a thing as sin, and that there were commandments to be obeyed.

Unless, of course, we don't want to believe the Bible about who Jesus is and what He said.

[Sparko]

Or my understanding of it, or the correct translation of it, or both...



The ten commandments are clear what sin is, then Jesus even narrowed it down to "the big 2". He obviously believed there was such a thing as sin, and that there were commandments to be obeyed.

Unless, of course, we don't want to believe the Bible about who Jesus is and what He said.

The guy who has Adam listed as his ancestor?

[Cow Poke]

The guy who has Adam listed as his ancestor?

The arguments I've seen don't claim Adam never existed, but that there was some form of human life before him.

[seer]

The arguments I've seen don't claim Adam never existed, but that there was some form of human life before him.

So you believe in a literal Adam.

[Cow Poke]

So you believe in a literal Adam.

Until shown otherwise, I do.

[seer]

The ten commandments are clear what sin is, then Jesus even narrowed it down to "the big 2". He obviously believed there was such a thing as sin, and that there were commandments to be obeyed.

Unless, of course, we don't want to believe the Bible about who Jesus is and what He said.

How do you know you have a correct understanding of it? Or perhaps an incorrect translation?

[Cow Poke]

How do you know you have a correct understanding of it? Or perhaps an incorrect translation?

I honestly don't worry about it - I've had my own experience with Christ transforming my life, and just last week, His extraordinary turn-around of my own adult daughter after she spent the last 20+ years slopping hogs.

I always go back to the Cross, and Jesus crucified, buried and risen again. If I'm wrong about some of the stuff in the Old Testament, I'll stand before the Lord guilty on that count.

[Cow Poke]

You haven't been paying much attention then. No historical Adam is a pretty common view.

Maybe I just don't run in those circles.