Hey, DNB and Season by Grace,
you’re both being jerks and worse than that you are both off topic.....take it outside
you’re both being jerks and worse than that you are both off topic.....take it outside
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
So you are saying the evidence that a PhD geneticist presents that proves that there was a literal Adam and Eve is wrong? The problem is that there is no science that proves by observation or scientific experiment that there were more than just one male and one female that were the parents of the whole of humanity. But the science of genetics proves that there were. Evolutionists use only a very small part of the genetic code to prove their point, but miss out over 80% of the genetic code that disproves their theory.I hear you, but....
I think the problem many Christians do not want to face is that a literal Adam and Eve is genetically impossible. So we are having to face the facts, not only does the story of Adam and Eve resemble a creation story, it does not match up with a scientific description of reality. Also, the theology of Original Sin was unknown before Augustine. I happen to believe in Original sin, but our awareness as a species of our sin could have developed along with our conscience....almost 500 year after Christ
Sorry aspen, this is verging on heretical, for sure.I hear you, but....
I think the problem many Christians do not want to face is that a literal Adam and Eve is genetically impossible. So we are having to face the facts, not only does the story of Adam and Eve resemble a creation story, it does not match up with a scientific description of reality. Also, the theology of Original Sin was unknown before Augustine. I happen to believe in Original sin, but our awareness as a species of our sin could have developed along with our conscience....almost 500 year after Christ
I hear you, but....
I think the problem many Christians do not want to face is that a literal Adam and Eve is genetically impossible. So we are having to face the facts, not only does the story of Adam and Eve resemble a creation story, it does not match up with a scientific description of reality. Also, the theology of Original Sin was unknown before Augustine. I happen to believe in Original sin, but our awareness as a species of our sin could have developed along with our conscience....almost 500 year after Christ
(1 Corinthians 15:45) "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit."
For me, a heretic is one who intentionally goes against what he personally knows or believes to be God's Way.
They are making man's science a judge of God's Word. They are actually saying that man's science is true, and God's Word is not. This is opposite to the Scripture, "Let God be true and every man a liar" (Romans 3:4).
But for science to prove something, it has to be through observation and experimentation. Because no one was there when Adam and Eve existed, direct scientific observation is impossible. But what has been observed is that through genetics, it has been shown that it is much more likely that humanity started with two original parents than through a larger group.
So you are saying the evidence that a PhD geneticist presents that proves that there was a literal Adam and Eve is wrong? The problem is that there is no science that proves by observation or scientific experiment that there were more than just one male and one female that were the parents of the whole of humanity. But the science of genetics proves that there were. Evolutionists use only a very small part of the genetic code to prove their point, but miss out over 80% of the genetic code that disproves their theory.
Also, if there were no Adam and Eve who disobeyed God and brought sin into the world, then there is no need for salvation, and Jesus didn't really come to die on the cross for our sins. He just came to make us better human beings.
So, people who don't accept the Bible description of Adam and Eve as real people and the parents of all humanity, cannot be truly Christians according to the Bible, and the Jesus they may believe in is a person from their own imagination, and not the Jesus of the Bible.
So, if you don't believe in a literal Adam and Eve, how do you know that you are really saved?
This is a video presentation by Dr. Georgia Purdom, a leading authority in the science of genetics:no offense, but what PhD Geneticist?
1. Nothing you have written has been backed up with sources
2. I believe the Bible - I am in the process of being saved and my salvation hinges on Christ, not Adam and Eve
Hi Paul, I may contend that original sin or not, would not necessarily deny the need for redemption. For, irrespective of the origination of sin, the fact remains that it exists. The Mosaic Law was sufficient to both, expose sin, and to condemn man accordingly. And as Paul stated, where sin abounded, grace did also abound. That is, sin was always prevalent, and permeated all eras and societies, and again, despite its origins.This is a video presentation by Dr. Georgia Purdom, a leading authority in the science of genetics:
Man was originally created in the image of God. But when He and Eve ate of the forbidden tree, thereby rebelling against God, they brought sin into the world, and through that sin, total corruption happened, and the world became a totally different place. It was no longer the perfect creation that God saw was very good. This included man. Man became a corrupted being, subject to decay and death. Therefore we cannot say that man now is in the same image of God because sin has muddied that image and man became ugly. The corruption got so great after a while, that God has to send a world-wide flood to wipe them all out, saving just Noah and his family.Hi Paul, I may contend that original sin or not, would not necessarily deny the need for redemption. For, irrespective of the origination of sin, the fact remains that it exists. The Mosaic Law was sufficient to both, expose sin, and to condemn man accordingly. And as Paul stated, where sin abounded, grace did also abound. That is, sin was always prevalent, and permeated all eras and societies, and again, despite its origins.
I say this only for the sake of argument, or to make a proper accusation of heresy. In other words, whether Adam & Eve existed, and therefore, original sin, may not by necessity deny man's need for redemption, and thus Christ.
I find much more shocking @aspen remark about the non-inherent consciousness of sin within man, that by any standard or assessment, defies all principles pertaining to man's image of his creator, and subsequently, expiation, propitiation and atonement.
Thus, unequivocally heretical!
Some good points. I don't believe in the theory of original sin, and therefore, the fallen image of man. Adam & Eve sinned before the fall, hence, that propensity was always there.Man was originally created in the image of God. But when He and Eve ate of the forbidden tree, thereby rebelling against God, they brought sin into the world, and through that sin, total corruption happened, and the world became a totally different place. It was no longer the perfect creation that God saw was very good. This included man. Man became a corrupted being, subject to decay and death. Therefore we cannot say that man now is in the same image of God because sin has muddied that image and man became ugly. The corruption got so great after a while, that God has to send a world-wide flood to wipe them all out, saving just Noah and his family.
So to say that current man is in the image of God is not strictly true. It is also meaningless to say that man need redemption if he is a slave of sin because of the corruption that came upon him because of Adam's rebellion against God. Paul says that through the first Adam death came into the world, but the second Adam (Jesus) brought life to those who believe in Him.
The first blood sacrifice happened after the Fall when God killed an animal to clothe Adam and Eve with its skin. Animal sacrifices for sin took place right through to the death of Jesus on the cross. His sacrifice was the one and for all sacrifice for sin, through which we are redeemed from the penalty and power of sin.
Maybe your reluctance to believe for certain that Adam and Eve really existed and that sin entered the world because of their disobedience, has come from non-Biblical teaching in your church. If your church teachers have taught evolution as a way that God created the world, then that teaching can corrupt a person's faith in the truth of the Bible. This type of teaching has caused many Millennial young people to desert the church. Their attitude in rejecting the church and their faith is that if their church teachers don't believe the Bible, why should they? The remarks from one prominent atheist who said that if Christians stop believing the literal truth of the Bible them it will be the death of Christianity within two generations. We see this happening with just 15% of the Millennial generation attending church - a big fall since the 1950s when 85% of young people were church members.Some good points. I don't believe in the theory of original sin, and therefore, the fallen image of man. Adam & Eve sinned before the fall, hence, that propensity was always there.
But, your point about fallen creation, and the other ontological mutations that occurred to man and nature i.e. women's pain in childbirth, desire for her husband, man's toil & sweat to harvest the earth, inception of thorns & thistles on the land, etc.. are evidential proof of the fall. But again, whether Adam & Eve caused this, or someone else, doesn't deny the veritable fact of it.
Thus, I still think whether we came from 2 original humans or not, does not preclude the need for redemption and Christ's Lordship.
Now, as I said, I believe in the Genesis account of creation, as I explained by the New Testament's attestation to it. I'm just trying to establish a maxim for Christian heresy, that a doctrine must necessitate man's condemnation and Christ's Messiaship.
The remarks from one prominent atheist who said that if Christians stop believing the literal truth of the Bible them it will be the death of Christianity within two generations.
Were you there? Do you know for sure?The science isn't about the real Adam and Eve. "Mitochondrial Eve" is the last common female ancestor of all living humans. "Y chromosome Adam" is her male counterpart. It is possible that they lived at the same time, (although the evidence would be compatible with them living thousands of years apart) but the
y weren't the first man and woman on Earth.
If you were a Biblical literalist, you'd assume they were Noah and his wife.
This is a video presentation by Dr. Georgia Purdom, a leading authority in the science of genetics:
Were you there? Do you know for sure?