Creation, Man, Sin: In the beginning.....What?

[polonius]

Regarding sin, JW posted:

No, it was a provision for the Adamic or inherited sin of those that would have or will recognize the value of that sacrifice.

RESPONSE: This subtopic takes the present dialogue in another direction. So much so, that I believe it appropriate to create a separate thread on the legend regarding the Original sin, man's guilt, and any need for redemption.

The founding legend of Judaism written in its present form in 800-700 BC begins with the story of creation in seven days and the relationship between God and man and sin.

In the beginning:

Scientists estimate that the hominid lineage diverged from the ape lineage 5 to 8 million years ago. Homo sapiens, the species to which we belong, has existed for about 100,000 years.

www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat06.html

So at the very onset, we have a vast disagreement between the Bibles seven days of creation account and what science tells us.

Lets, by way of overview, take a brief look at Bible truth regarding mans nature.

It all begins with an explanation as to why things die.

[marco]

So at the very onset, we have a vast disagreement between the Bibles seven days of creation account and what science tells us.

Well as you know, Polonius a day sometimes means a thousand years. But when we hear that Methuselah was approaching his first millennium when he died, we must accept this as factually accurate.

Other absurdities are easily overcome by the use of metaphor. Adam was symbolic of man's entry on the earth. Then God changed his mind about making a single human and took great trouble to perform surgery under anaesthetic on Adam's ribs.

Is there a problem?

[polonius]

So at the very onset, we have a vast disagreement between the Bibles seven days of creation account and what science tells us.

Well as you know, Polonius a day sometimes means a thousand years. But when we hear that Methuselah was approaching his first millennium when he died, we must accept this as factually accurate.

Other absurdities are easily overcome by the use of metaphor. Adam was symbolic of man's entry on the earth. Then God changed his mind about making a single human and took great trouble to perform surgery under anaesthetic on Adam's ribs.

Is there a problem?

RESPONSE:

Not as long as one admits the fictional nature of at least the first seven books of the Bible.

But the interesting thing is that a number of people base their belief system (or faith) on this fiction.

[polonius]

So at the very onset, we have a vast disagreement between the Bibles seven days of creation account and what science tells us.

Well as you know, Polonius a day sometimes means a thousand years. But when we hear that Methuselah was approaching his first millennium when he died, we must accept this as factually accurate.

Other absurdities are easily overcome by the use of metaphor. Adam was symbolic of man's entry on the earth. Then God changed his mind about making a single human and took great trouble to perform surgery under anaesthetic on Adam's ribs.

Is there a problem?

RESPONSE:

Not as long as one recognizes the fictional nature of at least the first seven books of the Bible.

But the interesting thing is that a number of people base their belief system (or faith) on this fiction.

More importantly, the Original sin story has its origin in this fictional writing, and "belief" in that part of the story has some far-reaching effects including the "faith" basis for much of Christian teachings.

[JehovahsWitness]

So at the very onset, we have a vast disagreement between the Bibles seven days of creation account and what science tells us.

What an interesting question, Jehovah's Witnesses are not creationists so we don't believe the creative days were literally 7 24-hour periods. That said, this isn't the science and religion sub-forum so I won't concern myself with so-called disagreement between the bible and the scientific concensus on certain timelines.

The fact is that the bible states that God created all living things, there is nothing at all in scripture that suggests this fact is fictional in nature.

JW

[marco]

More importantly, the Original sin story has its origin in this fictional writing, and "belief" in that part of the story has some far-reaching effects including the "faith" basis for much of Christian teachings.

There is a certain erudition in choosing which fictions are fact and which are wonderful metaphors. But it does seem odd to build an entire faith system on something that can be taken as a fictional account. Can faith grow from fiction?

[JehovahsWitness]

But the interesting thing is that a number of people base their belief system (or faith) on this fiction.

What in the context of the bible indicates to you that the creation account is allegorical or fictional in nature?

JW

[ttruscott]

But the interesting thing is that a number of people base their belief system (or faith) on this fiction.

I know of no one like this. Are you sure it is an accurate statement? They actually say "the reason I believe in Christ is that the Bible in Genesis is accurate"?

I know I came to Christ quite a long time before I decided Genesis said the truth of our beginnings in some way or other. I needed to trust that GOD was making it work, not the other way round.

[marco]

I know of no one like this. Are you sure it is an accurate statement? They actually say "the reason I believe in Christ is that the Bible in Genesis is accurate"?

That's not what Polonius said. Many believe that Christ came to redeem us as a result of Adam's original sin. Christ is in fact called the Redeemer.

I would think this is ample evidence that many base their faith on the Adam and Eve story.

[ttruscott]

More importantly, the Original sin story has its origin in this fictional writing, and "belief" in that part of the story has some far-reaching effects including the "faith" basis for much of Christian teachings.

There is a certain erudition in choosing which fictions are fact and which are wonderful metaphors. But it does seem odd to build an entire faith system on something that can be taken as a fictional account. Can faith grow from fiction?

Faith comes before accepting the possibly fictitious as the truth in my experience. Who ever reconciled the millions of years of science with one day equals a thousand years before they ever had faith for instance?