Posts by unshackled

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

Jethro Tull...didn't see that entering the discussion. Nice!

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

Simple answer: Jesus, a fictional character, died for another fictional character in a good novel, the Bible.

Yeah Sab...that is the simple answer. Wondered how one could reconcile evolution with christianity...but there's no reasoning with conclusion first thinking.

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

Again, taking it back to reconciling evolution with christianity…

If one accepts evolution then they know we evolved from a common simple lifeform. (the how and why of that is not yet known, but Cadellin had an interesting thread on this recently). We've learned that the building blocks of life are throughout the universe. Recently discovered were both water and amino acids on meteorites. As Carl Sagan used to say "we're star stuff". All made of the same various atoms.

So the questions are…when and where did sin enter the scene? At one point in our evolutionary history did all humans become inherently sinful? At the australopithecus stage? Were dinosaurs sinful? Was sin always present in the building blocks of life? Wouldn't all plants, animals/humans be sinful because we all come from the same source - the basic building blocks of life? Is the universe inherently sinful?

Again if you accept evolution and christianity you would need to answer those questions. How would one reconcile the need for a god to impregnate a woman to have a baby to atone for inherited sin? Why did that god wait some 14 billion years to come along and say "oh by the way, after all this time, turns out you're all sinful. Found a glitch in the building blocks of life and there's an error. So here, worship this guy named Jesus and we're all fixed. You too plants."

Zero logic there. What would be a logical alternative? The bible, and the story of sin, was written by a bunch of men to guilt people into submission.

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

Still doesn't make sense. Jesus literally died on a stick for a made up story about a guy? Seems everyone finds a different way to try make sense of it. Some scriptures are quoted as backup, but other scriptures are not accurate?

Romans 5:12-21 does describe how Adam’s sin brought death to mankind, his sin was passed on to all generations. Cruel and ludicrous to make all mankind pay for just a story....and it never really happened. I'm not buying the sinner label over a myth, fairy tale, allegory, whatever.

I suppose it comes down to a believer will find ways to believe, even if it doesn't make sense to anyone else.

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

The Adam's sin/Jesus atonement storyline is the backbone of Christianity.

Hi Tammy...this view is not exclusive to the JWs. Granted, it may not be "the backbone of Christianity", but it is a crucial component to the majority of Christianity. That said, your comment is still a shift from the main subject.

I'm guessing you take Genesis literally...I'm fairly new here, so could be wrong. So...do you believe that Adam really existed and Jesus had to atone for his sin for all mankind? And, if so, do you think one can be a Christian and believe the story of Adam was just an allegory?

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

Well put poopsie. My path has been similar to your description. I've chosen to scrape to the bottom of the barrel of our indoctrination. Not stopping at verifying if bible is the word of an almighty creator and doing extensive research on evolution. What a dose of reality it was.

Doesn't mean we can't still engage in biblical theological discussion. The study of religion is so intriguing. Truly interested in how a christian could justify accepting evolution and Jesus atoning for Adam's sin.

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

There are so many spin-off discussions to be had here. Hard to keep it on track.

For instance...

Jesus was either the biggest, fattest liar and charlatan who ever lived or he was who he said he was. There is NO middle ground here.

There may be no middle ground if those are, in fact, two concrete statements. But there are other grounds and questions: did Jesus even exist? is the bible simply the fictionalized work of man with nothing to do with a god? Or somewhere in between?

Bottom line is evolution is a fact. For those who claim to be christians and accept that fact...how do they continue to call themselves christians? It's a paradox.

Guess I was wondering if anyone could present a reconciliation of either: 1) acceptance of evolution and christianity, 2) not believing Genesis is literal and christianity.

Based on the biblical idea that Jesus atoned for Adam's sin...either option chops the legs off christianity.

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

The question is a good one for those few scientists (or anyone) who say "I'm a christian and I accept evolution...it was God's way of creation."

How would they answer - then who's sins did Jesus atone for? The Adam's sin/Jesus atonement storyline is the backbone of Christianity.

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

Yes Ding. it's understood many do interpret the bible literally, so the point being made wouldn't apply to them. "Is the bible to be taken literally?" is not the question of this thread.

Perhaps I should have titled the thread as the blog post title "Why Evolution and Christianity are Irreconcilable". Many Christians do not take Genesis literally. The Intelligent Design argument is being thrown about to try to marry up the bible with modern science. So the specific point is you can't accept evolution and also be a Christian. But by extension, you can't take not Genesis literally and also be a Christian.

106

If Genesis isn't taken literally, who's sin did Jesus die for?

by unshackled in

this is an interesting blog post by the author cj werleman - write of the books god hates you, hate him back and jesus lied - he was only human.

he writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.. the blog post dissects the latest gallup poll results regarding 40% of americans believe in biblical creationism.

but the point i found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the genesis account is literal....then jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, adam.. here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:.

unshackled

This is an interesting blog post by the author CJ Werleman - write of the books God Hates You, Hate Him Back and Jesus Lied - He Was Only Human. He writes with a good dose of humor which usually helps get his point across.

The blog post dissects the latest Gallup poll results regarding 40% of Americans believe in biblical creationism. But the point I found interesting in it was that if you don't believe the Genesis account is literal....then Jesus atoned for the sin of a fictitious character, Adam.

Here is a quote from the blog...but please give the whole thing a read, makes more sense that way:

"Well, Jesus gave himself to atone for the original sin, Adam’s sin. It’s there in the Bible. In fact, it’s unambiguously declared in Romans 5:12-21.To paraphrase those 9 verses: Adam’s sin brought death to mankind, and his sin was passed on ancestrally to all generations that followed, ending the possibility of eternal life for all. But then our cape crusader Jesus arrives on the scene, and because of his sacrifice or atonement for Adam’s sin, believers are rewarded eternal life in the hereafter. Amen.

In summary, it is theologically irreconcilable to disbelieve in the creation story of Adam, while retaining your belief in Christianity. To do so is to believe Jesus sacrificed himself to atone for a sin made by a fictitious person, somewhat akin of me jumping off a cliff so as to redeem Maverick’s illegal fly-by of the tower in Top Gun. It doesn’t fly. (I’m so sorry)"

It seems less and less believers take Genesis literally, particularly the Intelligent Design crowd. So how does one take the Genesis account as allegory, but also truly believe Jesus died to atone for Adam's sins? It doesn't make sense.