What becomes of our faith if the Genesis account is NOT literal?

[amigo de christo]

So, how does the atonement apply to that situation?

[

yea rather the question is how can one have the atonement
IF THEY DONT BELEIVE ON HE WHO GIVETH IT .
and the answer is , THEY DONT they will roast for their rejection of CHRIST JESUS .
Hey mr inclusive or would you rather be called mr steven . Makes no matter to me .
HEY mr inclusive , mr steven
IF one recieves NOT the FREE GIFT being offered
BELIEVE ME THEY WONT RECEIVE IT but will die IN THEIR SINS . DO KEEP THAT IN MIND . JESUS WONT be DENIED
and any who uses HIS GLORIOUS NAME to claim they believe
BUT THEN imply oh but it was not necessary for others to have beleived , hugging muslims , kissing and blowing smoke to korans
and budda statues , USES HIS NAME TO DENY HIM . and WOE UNTO THEM WHO DO SO and are in any way
co helpers TO THOSE who did so . SO , YEAH lets flee inclusivism and that path of interfaith
WHICH I DARN SURE KNOW the RCC BROUGHT TO THIS WORLD AND ITS FALSE RELIGOINS and TO PROTESETANTVILLE .
AND many prostestant daughters now do the will of they mama . HOW bout some BIBLE TIME to learn for ourselves .

 

[Lambano]

I don't know about opponents. The contrast seems to be between Jewish and Gentile believers... reading the verse like...

1 John 2:2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our (the Jewish believers') sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world (the Gentile believers who would come to Christ).

That sounds like you’re reading Paul (and George and Ringo) into John. I read it as “our” equals the author and his target audience and small circle of friends, and “the whole world” as everybody else.

 

[Wick Stick]

That sounds like you’re reading Paul (and George and Ringo) into John. I read it as “our” equals the author and his target audience and small circle of friends, and “the whole world” as everybody else.

Not so much Paul. It's the LXX usage of kosmos I'm incorporating.

 

[Lizbeth]

We do we live in a world where everything living will die. Even babies who can't possibly be held responsible for their actions, even though babies are about as self-centered as they come. Why is that?

Why DO we sin? You can't say "free will". That great founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther, wrote a book called The Bondage of the Will. (It was basically a reply to Erasmus's post, On Free Will. Same thing we do here using 16th century technology.) Apparently, humanity is really into Bondage. Why is that?

Seems from scripture that fallen man sins simply because it is his nature (Adamic) to sin. Our old nature is a sinful nature. It is warped/marred and thus not in line with the image of God and His nature. This is why Jesus gives a new nature (spirit/heart) to those who receive Him....which new nature/spirit begins to do battle with our old nature so as to overcome and rule over it. As we allow through our willingness, desire and seeking, and cooperation.

 

[Lambano]

Not so much Paul. It's the LXX usage of kosmos I'm incorporating.

If John wrote both the Gospel and the Epistles that bear his name, I don’t think he identifies as Jewish anymore.

 

[Lizbeth]

This point causes me a massive amount of cognitive dissonance. (something most won't admit)

The gospel and the New Testament narrative unravel when these things aren't literal.

- The geologies are meaningless. (or in serious error)
- Who wrote the Books of Moses? (and when)
- If Adam wasn't a literal human then he didn't literally sin.
- If Adam didn't literally sin, then there is no original sin.
- If there is no original sin then being born in Adam's race does not make you a sinner.
- If we are not redeemed from original sin by Christ's payment of the death penalty...
- Then the Atonement was of none effect.
- If the Atonement was of none effect, we are lost in our sin and awaiting judgment of our works.
- We all fall short of the perceived standard (the glory of God) and stand condemned.
- Faith in Christ can't help us, the Atonement is null and void. (as outlined above)
- Where does that leave us?

Alternatively:
- There is anecdotal evidence (and in some cases historical evidence) that faith in Christ can help us.
- And that a renewed relationship with the creator is possible. (assuming we were alienated prior)

But how can this be when church doctrine is a house of cards?
- Is a relationship with the creator of figment of our imagination? (wishful thinking?)
- Might we conjure up our own salvation to quell the fear of the unknown?

It's enough to drive one mad. (as my British friends might say)

I like what some atheists conclude.
Living your life as if there might be a God works better than living your life as if there isn't a God, (just in case?) - LOL

]

Wow. Sorry to say but you sound as though you are someone with no faith or understanding of faith who is working for the wrong side. A real Christian would be refuting atheistic arguments, not bringing them up without refuting them.

My answer to your cognitive dissonance accusation is to say.....why do you think we need to rightly DIVIDE the word of God....between literal and allegorical for one thing. You are assuming wrongly that the two are necessarily mutually exclusive. For example why couldn't Adam have been a literal man as well as as being "a figure for he who was come to come"?

God's word doesn't contradict itself when we understand it properly by the Spirit of the one who wrote it....because the natural mind of the natural man can't perceive and understand the things of God without His help.

 

[Wick Stick]

If John wrote both the Gospel and the Epistles that bear his name, I don’t think he identifies as Jewish anymore.

'Identifies' is a some pretty modern terminology. I don't subscribe to the modern notion of self-identification as having intrinsic worth or veracity. People are out there identifying as ponies, kittens, and aliens. That doesn't make it so.

John's gospel (or rather Jesus' teachings in his gospel) defines membership in Israel in terms of belief and obedience, rather than genealogies. John thinks of himself as a child of Abraham, because he believes he has unity with Jesus Christ, who in turn has unity with Father God.

1 John 4: 10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son [to be] the propitiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. 12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us. 13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. 14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son [to be] the Saviour of the world. 15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. 16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

 

[St. SteVen]

Not necessarily. The idea of Jewish believers includes an idea of Jewish non-believers, so if the second thing is like the first...

Why would Jewish non-believers by referred to as us? ("for ours")
Wouldn't they be included in "the whole world"? (outside the Elect)

[

 

[Lambano]

'Identifies' is a some pretty modern terminology. I don't subscribe to the modern notion of self-identification as having intrinsic worth or veracity.

You’re missing the point. The language used by the LXX translators reflects the world-view of 70 Jewish scholars. Jewish writers typically see the world as divided into Jews and Goyim. Us and Them. I see it in the OT, I see it in some of the non canonical writings, and I can see it in modern Jewish writings. Us vs. Them affects all cultures. (We all do it.) Now, Paul moves fluidly between the Jewish and Greek worlds. “To those under Torah, I became as one under Torah. To those without the Law…”. I don’t see this in John. For John, who is “Us” and who is “Them”?

Based on the language used in John’s Gospel, the Jewish people are to him “Them”, not “Us”. There’s a reason John is considered by some to be anti-Semitic.

 

[Wick Stick]

Why would Jewish non-believers by referred to as us? ("for ours")

I don't think they are

Wouldn't they be included in "the whole world"? (outside the Elect)

The word used there is often used synonymously with 'Gentiles' and unbelieving Jews still aren't Gentiles

 

[Lambano]

And his name appears in genealogies, so he can't really be a figurative representative, unless the genealogies are bogus.

If the genealogies were symbolic only, would that bother you?

 

[Wick Stick]

You’re missing the point. The language used by the LXX translators reflects the world-view of 70 Jewish scholars. Jewish writers typically see the world as divided into Jews and Goyim. Us and Them. I see it in the OT, I see it in some of the non canonical writings, and I can see it in modern Jewish writings. Us vs. Them affects all cultures. (We all do it.) Now, Paul moves fluidly between the Jewish and Greek worlds. “To those under Torah, I became as one under Torah. To those without the Law…”.

I follow this and agree so far

I don’t see this in John. For John, who is “Us” and who is “Them”?

In 1st John, "us" seems to be the apostles, and "they" is John's audience:

1John 1: 1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2 For the life was manifested, and we have seen [it], and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

In the verses we were looking at, he adds "whole world" which seems to be a third thing that's neither of those.

Based on the language used in John’s Gospel, the Jewish people are to him “Them”, not “Us”. There’s a reason John is considered by some to be anti-Semitic.

I think John would define "us" and "them" in terms of "true Israelites" and "false Israelites." John hasn't made himself something else, but he is excluding some others from the group.

John 1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and exclaimed, "Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!"

Several chapters are devoted to developing the idea that Abraham's children are those who believe, rather than those with the right list of ancestors.

 

[St. SteVen]

If the genealogies were symbolic only, would that bother you?

The short answer is "Yes."
But that may be a product of my religious upbringing.

What's the point of giving a detailed genealogy if it isn't literal?

Jesus even makes a point of being the Son of David. (from the root of Jesse)
So what, if it isn't literal?

[

 

[Wick Stick]

What's the point of giving a detailed genealogy if it isn't literal?

My understanding is that the pre-flood genealogies are there to show the decline of mankind.

Both start with Enoch = "foundation," progress to Jared/Irad = "descends," and end with Lamech = "low place."

Also, the 2 genealogies appear to be the same genealogy with a few differences on either side, which should clue us in to the idea that at least one of them isn't right/literal.

Jesus even makes a point of being the Son of David. (from the root of Jesse)
So what, if it isn't literal?

That's about position, and fulfillment:

David is king of Judah. So is Jesus.
David is 'begotten' by God (Psa 2). Jesus is the 'only-begotten' Son of God.
David is a priest, after the order of Melchizedek. Jesus and Melchizedek himself are the only other members of the order.
David is counted among the prophets. Jesus prophesies.
David was born in Bethlehem. Jesus, too.
David was a shepherd. Jesus is the 'Good Shepherd.'

The intervening list of names is not as important as the types/antitypes and fulfillment.

 

[Jack]

"What becomes of our faith if the Genesis account is NOT literal?"

Jesus said it is LITERAL!

Luke 17:26-29
26 And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: 27 They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.
28 Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built;
29 but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all.

 

[St. SteVen]

What becomes of our faith if the Genesis account is NOT literal?​

This point causes me a massive amount of cognitive dissonance. (something most won't admit)

The gospel and the New Testament narrative unravel when these things aren't literal.

- The geologies are meaningless. (or in serious error)
- Who wrote the Books of Moses? (and when)
- If Adam wasn't a literal human then he didn't literally sin.
- If Adam didn't literally sin, then there is no original sin.
- If there is no original sin then being born in Adam's race does not make you a sinner.
- If we are not redeemed from original sin by Christ's payment of the death penalty...
- Then the Atonement was of none effect.
- If the Atonement was of none effect, we are lost in our sin and awaiting judgment of our works.
- We all fall short of the perceived standard (the glory of God) and stand condemned.
- Faith in Christ can't help us, the Atonement is null and void. (as outlined above)
- Where does that leave us?

Alternatively:
- There is anecdotal evidence (and in some cases historical evidence) that faith in Christ can help us.
- And that a renewed relationship with the creator is possible. (assuming we were alienated prior)

But how can this be when church doctrine is a house of cards?
- Is a relationship with the creator of figment of our imagination? (wishful thinking?)
- Might we conjure up our own salvation to quell the fear of the unknown?

It's enough to drive one mad. (as my British friends might say)

I like what some atheists conclude.
Living your life as if there might be a God works better than living your life as if there isn't a God, (just in case?) - LOL

 

[BrotherMJ]

We are Saved be believing what is Written.Faith comes by hearing the word of God.If you dont believe,You cannot Receive salvation.Creation story happened thousands of year as Recorded in the bible.God revealed to abraham our salvation will come through Faith.Believe and Receive Salvation.You dont believe,you are Lost Forever.

 

[HealthyShape]

​

- The geologies are meaningless. (or in serious error)
- Who wrote the Books of Moses? (and when)
- If Adam wasn't a literal human then he didn't literally sin.
- If Adam didn't literally sin, then there is no original sin.
- If there is no original sin then being born in Adam's race does not make you a sinner.
- If we are not redeemed from original sin by Christ's payment of the death penalty...
- Then the Atonement was of none effect.
- If the Atonement was of none effect, we are lost in our sin and awaiting judgment of our works.
- We all fall short of the perceived standard (the glory of God) and stand condemned.
- Faith in Christ can't help us, the Atonement is null and void. (as outlined above)
- Where does that leave us?

1. The geologies are mythological, symbolic. Or at least a mixture.
2. The books of Moses had multiple authors and the "final" composition occurred during the Babylonian exile around the 7th century BC.
3. Sounds logical.
4. Also logical.
5. And it never did, you are a sinner because you sinned, not because you were born. Adam plays a representative role, you are not technically inheriting anyone else's guilt. Not from your father, not from your mother and also not from Adam.
6. The atonement has the effect for your sins.
And the rest of your points lead nowhere, because you lost the way in the point number 5.

 

[St. SteVen]

We are Saved be believing what is Written.Faith comes by hearing the word of God.If you dont believe,You cannot Receive salvation.Creation story happened thousands of year as Recorded in the bible.God revealed to abraham our salvation will come through Faith.Believe and Receive Salvation.You dont believe,you are Lost Forever.

Welcome to the forum.

Is salvation something God does or something we do?

 

[BrotherMJ]

Welcome to the forum.

Is salvation something God does or something we do?

Action start by us.You need to be sorry about your sins and Repent then God effect our salvation then we are sealed by the Holy spirit