Does the Christian message fall apart without a literal interpretation of Genesis?

by nicolaou 175 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  tec

  This debate isn't about a literal interpretation of Genesis. It's about Paul's statements (spiritualization) regarding the fall of man, like in Romans 5 and 1st Cor 15.

  You're right. It is about what Paul said, and how that has been interpreted.

  Let's pretend that Adam and Eve never existed and that Genesis is fiction. It follows that it absolutely must be true that sin never enters into human society through Adam and Eve and therefore there is no need or reason for atonement.

  But sin is still here. So Christ came to atone for those sins, and those people who do sin. Even if the story is a myth (and I am not saying that it is or is not), and Adam/Eve simply symbolize mankind and the heart of mankind... then sin entered still through their actions way back at the beginning of our existence.

  Robdar is the one who told me that the Jewish faith does not blame Eve. In fact, it is Adam who has the repenting to do to God, not Eve.

  I have never understood how Christians can dismiss Genesis and still find a basis for the animal sacrifices and prophets that led to Christ, 'the lamb of god that takes away the sin of the world.'

  Just to be clear, considering that the Adam/Eve story might be symbolic rather than literal does not mean that a person is dismissing Genesis. It still teaches the same moral lesson, either way.

  Tammy
• 

  trevor

  Tammy - The difficulty is that according to the bible, both Jesus and Paul quote from Genesis and repeat its references to Adam.

  If The Adam story is not to be taken literaly, then we have to see Jesus and paul as symbolic figures also.
• 

  nicolaou

  Deputy Dog: This debate isn't about a literal interpretation of Genesis. It's about Paul's statements (spiritualization) regarding the fall of man . .

  Tammy: You're right. It is about what Paul said, and how that has been interpreted.

  Classic 'strawman' diversionary tactic, please reread the title of MY topic and MY opening post! Your slippery attempts at obfuscation don't fool everyone. Now please excuse me while I attempt to wrench this discussion back to it's original intent.

  Surely the central theme of the Christian message is that Christ died to redeem us from Adamic sin. Tammy, DD, is this at least a premise that we can all agree on?
• 

  tec

  I have used references to books or movies that my children know well and love, in order to emphasize a moral lesson that a particular character learned. (or failed to learn as the case may be)

  People do the same with things like Aesop's fables. Also, how many people know of the Good Samaritan story, and apply the moral of that story to their lives, and reference the good samaritan, even though he was a fictional character? The story Jesus told was just that: a story. But the lesson was the same. Or the prodigal son. There are other examples of this as well.

  Just because something or someone is referenced to relay a moral does not mean that it has to have been a literal, real-life story. It could be, but it does not have to be.

  Tammy
• 

  tec

  Classic 'strawman' diversionary tactic, please reread the title of MY topic and MY opening post! Your slippery attempts at obfuscation don't fool everyone. Now please excuse me while I attempt to wrench this discussion back to it's original intent.

  No one is diverting anything. I gave you my answer; I even redefined it so as not to include you or anyone else who does not want to be in my answer.

  Surely the central theme of the Christian message is that Christ died to redeem us from Adamic sin. Tammy, DD, is this at least a premise that we can all agree on?

  No, we do not agree. Christ died to redeem us from OUR sin (those of us who do sin, that is). The premise you speak of (the jw and some fundy groups premise) makes it seem as if we are not to blame for our own actions. Its just another way to blame someone else for what we, ourselves, do. IMO.

  Tammy
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Have you all ever seen Tammy's fashion accessory:

  

  No sense in looking around. Full speed ahead with your beliefs, Tammy.
• 

  designs

  'Christianity' and particularly 'Paul' reinvented and reinterpreted Genesis to meet a new criteria.

  Go ask your local Rabbi for the Jewish view.
• 

  unshackled

  Okay everyone...since we are ALL sinners...I have an alternative to using Jesus for sin atonement. Yes you read that right. So if you're not into invisible friends, I have a Hazelnut tree that is no ordinary Hazelnut tree. Eat one nut from this tree and all your sins will be atoned for! I call it the Nutty Atonement Tree.
  
  It works for ANYTHING. Forgot your anniversary? Eat a nut, all better! Lied on your taxes? Nut time! Parked in a handicap spot? Mmm...nutty.
  
  Here's the special JW Forum deal I'm offering: ONLY $10 per nut....OR....3 nuts for $25! One week only...PM your orders now.
• 

  designs

  Hazelnut coffee mmmmm
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Nic

  Classic 'strawman' diversionary tactic, please reread the title of MY topic and MY opening post! Your slippery attempts at obfuscation don't fool everyone. Now please excuse me while I attempt to wrench this discussion back to it's original intent.

  There is no attempt at diversion. I just stated a fact. Just ask designs there are many ways, (some literal, some not) to interpret Genesis. You can even take a literal interpretation of Genesis and reject the New Testament. It's not Genesis that's the problem. I merely pointed out that, you're having a problem with Paul's (New Testament) interpretation, probably because you don't believe you are a sinner.

  Surely the central theme of the Christian message is that Christ died to redeem us from Adamic sin. Tammy, DD, is this at least a premise that we can all agree on?

  I even agreed with you, when I said:

  You're right Nic, if you're not a sinner, you don't need a Savior, you'll live forever.

  I'll agree with you, that if you reject and/or don't accept Paul's (NT) interpretation (spiritualized as it is) of Genesis, you don't need a Savior. Christianity falls apart when you reject the New Testament/Christ.