Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Are we all descendants of Adam and Eve? | Genesis | Just Read Mark | 84808 | ||
The meaning of Adam and Eve. A consensus seems to be expressed about the literal interpretation of the opening chapters of Genesis. As a Christian who believes the Bible is God's inspired word, I would like to present another interpretation. There are, in fact, many Bible-believing Christians who interpret these chapters differently. I find that the opening chapters of Genesis contain a mythic language that suggests we are not to interpret these texts within the "scientific/rationalistic" mode. The language moves away from mythic writing, and into much more concrete history, with the story of Abram and Sarai. It is easy to get hung up on questions of "who married who" etc, and get distracted from the real meaning of the passage. The God-given story of Adam and Eve tells us essential things about what it means to be human. That's why Adam's name isn't a proper name, but a generic term meaning "man." It tells us, for instance, that all humans are of one family, from all races cultures. It tells us that men and women are made in God's image. It tells us about how God intended intimacy between humanity and God, but we chose rebellion instead. It tells us about the relationship between men and women, and the communal character of being human. The expulsion from the garden speaks to our sense of loss and alienation in the world -- and also about the discipline of work and toil. There are so many profound themes wrapped into these short chapters. We don't need to know what literally or scientically happened, to embrace this Word as foundationally true. Focusing on difficulties in literal interpretation prevents us from getting to the substantive meat that can feed our souls. I would suggest that there is a danger in using a literal lense on these passages of scripture. If we claim mythic passages as literal, we lose credibility when we claim other difficult passages are literal. The language of the resurrection accounts, for instance, talk about witnesses and proofs, specific places and times. It is clear that the gospel writers and early Christians believed the resurrection to be a historic, literal occurance. If we sully our credibility with Genesis, it makes it harder to make the case for the resurrection. I do not intend to be divisive or difficult. Instead, I hope that we can allow for some diversity in the reading. In fact, I don't want to discuss the "literal vs. mythic" issue -- but rather, to shift the emphasis to "what does this text say to us, anyway?" Peace. |
||||||
2 | Are we all descendants of Adam and Eve? | Genesis | Radioman2 | 84812 | ||
Creation: Believe it or Not "Understanding origins in the book of Genesis is foundational to the rest of the Bible. If Genesis chapter 1 and chapter 2 don't tell us the truth, then why should we believe anything else in the Bible? If it says in the New Testament that the Creator is our Redeemer, and if God is not the Creator, then maybe He's not the Redeemer either. If it tells us in 2 Peter that God Himself will bring about an instantaneous dissolution of the entire universe as we know it, that God in a moment will uncreate everything, then that has tremendous bearing upon His power to create...the same One who with a word can uncreate the universe is capable of creating it as quickly as He desires. "So what we believe about creation, what we believe about Genesis has implications all the way to the end of Scripture, implications with regard to the veracity and truthfulness of Scripture, implications as to the gospel and implications as to the end of human history all wrapped up in how we understand origins in the book of Genesis. The matter of origins then is absolutely critical to all human thinking. It becomes critical to how we conduct our lives as human beings. Without an understanding of origins, without a right understanding of origins, there is no way to comprehend ourselves. There is no way to understand humanity as to the purpose of our existence, and as to our destiny. If we cannot believe what Genesis says about origins, we are lost as to our purpose and our destiny. Whether this world and its life as we know it evolved by chance, without a cause, or was created by God has immense comprehensive implications for all of human life. (...) "Either you believe God did create the heavens and the earth or you believe He did not. Really those are the only two valid options you have. And if you believe that God did create the heavens and the earth, then you are left with the only record of that creation and that's Genesis 1 and you are bound to accept the text of Genesis 1 as the only appropriate and accurate description of that creative act. "So again I say, you're left really with two choices. You either believe Genesis or you don't. You either believe the Genesis account that God created the heavens and the earth, or you believe they somehow evolved out of random chance. "This is more than just a secondary issue. " [Excerpt from "Creation: Believe it or Not--Part 1" (www.gty.org/Broadcast/transcripts/90-208.htm)] |
||||||
3 | Are we all descendants of Adam and Eve? | Genesis | Mathew | 84818 | ||
Radioman2. You had said that if we beleive in the Bible creation then we "are bound to accept the text of Genesis 1 as the only appropriate and accurate description of that creative act." Is there any reason that Gen.1 cannot be accurate? What are the pitfalls to beleiving Gen.1 over random chance? |
||||||
4 | Are we all descendants of Adam and Eve? | Genesis | Radioman2 | 84824 | ||
To read more go to: "Creation: Believe it or Not--Part 1" (www.gty.org/Broadcast/transcripts/90-208.htm)] There is no reason why Genesis 1 cannot be accurate. There are no "pitfalls" to believing the Bible over random chance theories. To read more go to: "Creation: Believe it or Not--Part 1" (www.gty.org/Broadcast/transcripts/90-208.htm)] |
||||||