by AK - Jeff 52 Replies latest watchtower bible
Leolaia - "I think first it is important to distinguish the Society's Eden-centered explanation of the "ransom" (such as the "scales" concept of Jesus and Adam as equally perfect beings) from the variety of soteriological concepts in the NT"
Still not clear to me difference in concept between WTS ransom and NT ransom.
Did you discuss in the past ?
Can you link , please ?
"Doesn't an 'allegorical' Garden of Eden nullify the need for a Ransom?":
No. Use Edit > Find for "Ransom" and it's a couple of clicks down the page at
the next link.
http://gtw6437.tripod.com/id22.html
"I have noted in the past few months or years....that the 'fall back' position
is often that the Garden of Eden account is just allegory, not literal."
See the article at the next link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegorical_interpretations_of_Genesis
But it occurs to me that if it is just allegorical, then there is no specific event to mark the 'fall of man' and 'original sin'. Without that, what purpose is served with the idea of a 'ransom' in which 'the last Adam' overcomes the sin of Adam in the garden.
I agree totally. It was the above thought that caused me leave Christianity behind.
I don't think that most ancient minds thought in the theological depth expressed by Leo here. In fact, I doubt most modern Christians think in that depth at all. I had a helluva time understanding just what the hell you said there.
Point is: Don't most Christians believe that mankind needs 'ransomed' from sin inherited from Adam and Eve? And don't many of them fall back to defend the ransom with claiming allegory for the GoE account when scientific evidence overwhelms the story? Additionally, just the Pauline reference to GoE should lend some weight to the opinion that Paul thought it historical? Though it could be suggested that he could have argued from an allegorical standpoint, he did not argue from that standpoint. No where in the Bible does Paul, Jesus, God, Noah, Abraham, or anyone else suggest that GoE is allegorical. Some other non-canonical writers are mentioned above, but most fundamental Christians would not accept them as legitimate in matters of eternal importance.
Further - and I speak from a layman's standpoint, if man did not 'fall', but was 'sinful' from some indeterminate point, perhaps since his existence, as the allegorical position suggests, then why, how?
No, I think most Christians want to accept the GoE account, but cannot any longer justify it. If they accept the allegorical view, then man was always 'sinful' in need of 'redemption'? How is that consistent with what most believe?
What am I missing here? If mankind did not 'fall', then from what was he relieved?
Jeff
What I mean to say is: If man did not 'sin' or 'fall', then isn't he, and wasn't he at the time of Jesus, just in his 'natural state', therefore needing no 'release' no 'ransom' from his sinful nature?
Jeff
But it occurs to me that if it is just allegorical, then there is no specific event to mark the 'fall of man' and 'original sin'. Without that, what purpose is served with the idea of a 'ransom' in which 'the last Adam' overcomes the sin of Adam in the garden.
Even if Adam is only symbolic of (totally depraved) sinfull man, you still need a saviour.
What I mean to say is: If man did not 'sin' or 'fall', then isn't he, and wasn't he at the time of Jesus, just in his 'natural state', therefore needing no 'release' no 'ransom' from his sinful nature?
His "natural state" is sinfull.
I need no saviour sir. Speak for yourself. I really wish christians would do that, they speak on behalf of humankind FAR TOO MUCH & some of us are getting just a little sick of it to be quite honest.
One possibilty (though admittedly remote) that pops into my mind in regard to this topic:
1. Man evolves to the point where God now holds him accountable - in effect, God used evolution to "create" man, and then deals with a pair of Cro-Magnons named "Adam" and "Eve" when He decides that man is highly enough evolved.
2. Man fails to obey God, hence the "fall".
In this way, the story in Genesis remains allegorical, and yet there is some need for a ransom.
Of course, in this scenario, the ransom is not quite the same as the Biblical ransom.
Except evolution is not a progression, & our morality is not better than that of other animals, it just suits our needs. We have the luxury to be moral. So all in all, christianity & judaism = fail.
