Can you defend biblical morality/relevance? Adam and Eve

[Gone Apostate]

I'm new to this forum so i apologize if this is an exhausted topic. I would really like to see what everyone has to say about this. I know some of the standard responses but I'm sure that personal approaches to this topic will add much more to the discussion as I have been exposed to it.

How does our understandings of the stories/traditions of our faith color the way we view, and act in, the world today?

If this is a topic that generates some discussion I would like to follow it up with similar ones but for now why don't we just start at the beginning, at least the beginning of the most commonly held religious beliefs - the creation story, from the Old Testament. This is a story shared by Muslims, Jews and Christians – who together make up over 51% of the religious traditions in the world and about 85% of those in America.

According to a 2010 Gallup poll 40% of Americans believe that man was created in his present form, by God no more than 10,000 years ago. This is down from 55% in 2006 (according to a CBS poll)
.
This is more than a theological discussion. It’s a very hot political one as well. There are still stickers in text books across the country, warning that evolution is ‘just a theory’. There is a renewed push in several states to legislate that evolution be taught with more than the usual disclaimers. 60% of biology teachers are afraid to teach the theory and spend little time on it, if at all. 13 percent of the teachers said they "explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design…�

So here some questions to consider. I would really like to hear people’s answers to some of these however, if they don’t interest you but the topic does, forget them, just share your thoughts. Please and thank you!

1) Is the theory of evolution a threat to your faith? Why or why not?
2) Are there any moral, spiritual lessons to be learned from Adam and Eve? How can we apply them today?
3) Do you believe in the concept of “Original Sin�. If so, how does it impact how you view the world?
4) What, if anything, do feel it says about the character of God, or morality in general?
5) If you believe the story to be a literal, historical account – what are your thoughts on the evidence/science that counters this understanding?
6) If you believe the story has some truth, if not literal, what do you consider it to be? An allegory – if so, of what?
7) If you think the story has no historical validity, how would you describe its role/impact in our society? Would you like to see that role changed? How?

My viewpoint:
I consider it a creation myth on historical par with those of every other faith. I also think there is some seriously questionable morality on the part of the character of God in this story as well. I absolutely don't think that it should be a curriculum topic in science classes, either as young earth creation theory or as intelligent design. The only place I think it has a place it schools would be in a literature or comparative religion class, the latter being one I wish we had as standard curriculum in the US, like they do in the UK.

Thank you for reading and please leave a comment.

Stats:
http://religions.pewforum.org/reports
https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... /2122.html
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_public.htm
Teaching the controversy:
http://pewforum.org/Science-and-Bioethi ... State.aspx
http://www.antievolution.org/cs/ncse_20110121
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41313808/ns ... e-science/

[Gone Apostate]

um..for point of fact..i have never said i have 'the true' meaning.
there are lots of stories in the bible that we will never know the 'true meaning', simply because we have lost certain reference points among time,when it was written it uses allegories of the times when it was written, although we can tease out what those allegories meant, there are some that are lost.

moses wrote the story of adam and eve(current scholars claim), so to claim 'no interpretation' is in error,moses was not there and could not know, but through the inspiration of God, moses had written genesis.

True. I falsely assumed that. You were saying what it means to you. What it means to you is what it means to you and that’s what I asked for.

Let me also correct myself in another way. In agreement with something you said. I don’t know how the first writings were intended to be received or how it was understood some people might have more educated theories than mine but I have to admit I don’t know, I just assume.

I’ll add my own point of fact though. Theologians and preachers may claim Moses wrote the story of Adam and Eve, but scholars (biblical scholars, biblical historians) usually don’t. I’m not so well versed as to say categorically there is a coconscious but my small amount of research seems to indicate that there is a one and it is that first books of the Bible are a meld of several authors (which is used to explain the differences in the two descriptions of the creation among others)

when ever i go to the bible to look for a specific passage or lesson, i have a tough time finding it, no matter what the verse/story is, i do know i have had other insights into the bible only to discover later that the bible does back up those insights.

That is the point I was trying to make. The book that is supposed to be the basis of the religion rarely can be relied upon to clearly and unequivocally support many of the doctrines/values of that religion. I think the book is NOT divinely inspired unless divinity seeks to breed confusion and contention. Good people like yourself make the most of it and draw positive and constructive inferences from life and what they are taught and then try to make the Bible fit. Why do that? Why not just be the good guy that you are without having to make it fit into this idea of what the bible based religion should be but clearly isn't. Ditch the book, ditch the doctrine and just be a good guy.

[ConiectoErgoSum]

First off, the bible is not the basis of the religion, I think its the other way around... the religion happened first, then people eventually decided to write stuff down.

Let's say the bible is in fact not divinely inspired (though my opinions lean to the contrary). Under this assumption:

The bible is still important. It's a record. Without it, the religions that inspired it would have no way of staying consistent through the years. Its kinda the same reason the constitution is in place. The people that wrote it had knowledge that we don't. They figured out some life-lessons the hard way over and over and over, so we don't have to repeat their mistakes.

The lesson of the old testament is not "obey without question", it's more like "value the advice of the ages higher than you value your own observations".

[NMSquirrel]

That is the point I was trying to make. The book that is supposed to be the basis of the religion rarely can be relied upon to clearly and unequivocally support many of the doctrines/values of that religion. I think the book is NOT divinely inspired unless divinity seeks to breed confusion and contention.

now here is the twist;
what if God had wanted the bible to be vague and susceptible to error?
I think of it like this..
what if i did have all the answers? (or enough to be considered all)
how would ppl treat me? would they blame me if the advice i gave them is in error?
what if they didn't apply my advice properly? would they look to me for advice bypassing their own ability to figure out what is best for themselves?
IOW would they be listening to me or God in me? if they are listening for God in me then it doesn't matter who i am..if they are listening to me, then every piece of my humanity that shows, will be used to discredit me (use it as an excuse to not listen to me)
<i think i am getting away from my point again..>
maybe the bible is meant to be controversial so we would NOT worship a book.
there are christians and there are bibleians..(there is pry a way better term for this).. the ones that are so focused on the bible being literal (do as your told) that they miss what God is asking them to do.

Good people like yourself make the most of it and draw positive and constructive inferences from life and what they are taught and then try to make the Bible fit.

Mr. Pratt...
my high school biology teacher, would start the class with "You get out of life what you put into it,no more,no less"

and my relationship with the bible is more of a life/God has taught me certain lessons, and upon reading certain passages, made perfect sense. so its not a 'make it fit' as it is more of a 'how it fits'

Why do that? Why not just be the good guy that you are without having to make it fit into this idea of what the bible based religion should be but clearly isn't. Ditch the book, ditch the doctrine and just be a good guy.

there is that term again 'make it fit'..i suppose this qualifies for the majority of Christians out there..but my own experience is to find a church home that teaches what i think God has taught me, IOW find a church where i can be myself, and not made to feel worthless because of my differences.( I sincerely believe God does NOT want a world filled with clones)

[NMSquirrel]

The bible is still important. It's a record. Without it, the religions that inspired it would have no way of staying consistent through the years. Its kinda the same reason the constitution is in place. The people that wrote it had knowledge that we don't. They figured out some life-lessons the hard way over and over and over, so we don't have to repeat their mistakes.

Good point..
we still don't listen...

The lesson of the old testament is not "obey without question", it's more like "value the advice of the ages higher than you value your own observations".

i would argue that is new testament thinking.
but i can't cite scripture..(names and numbers thing) but i have still read it all,and study it once a week..

[ConiectoErgoSum]

lets not turn this into too much of a tangent, but...

<begin tangent>
well... i mean the whole old testament is the repeated mistakes of the Jews. Maybe it's the new testament that eventually references all this stuff and uses it to make a point (honestly i don't feel like looking this up either), but the meat of this lesson about valuing the wisdom of the ages is the history of the Jews and their wrestles-with-God nature.
<end tangent>

[Gone Apostate]

First off, the bible is not the basis of the religion, I think its the other way around... the religion happened first, then people eventually decided to write stuff down.

Let's say the bible is in fact not divinely inspired (though my opinions lean to the contrary). Under this assumption:

The bible is still important. It's a record. Without it, the religions that inspired it would have no way of staying consistent through the years. Its kinda the same reason the constitution is in place. The people that wrote it had knowledge that we don't. They figured out some life-lessons the hard way over and over and over, so we don't have to repeat their mistakes.

The lesson of the old testament is not "obey without question", it's more like "value the advice of the ages higher than you value your own observations".

3 quick points.

1. If the book is supposed to be a way to establish some consistency, than apparently God didn't design either it, or us, very well because consistent the faiths have not been.

2. Of course the religion predates the book, but the book is, as you say the corner stone of the religions today. It is the rule-book and yet so few actually read/apply what it actually says - instead they recreate it to fit the evolving social consciousness. (again i point to historical inconsistencies)

3. The OT is much more so about strict obedience to a powerful and vengeful God then it is about passing on ancient wisdom. Which is not to say that there isn't wisdom therein, there is and we dismiss it at great cost, but it is not the predominate theme. I bet for every verse you can quote that shares with us a pearl of wisdom I can find two that do nothing but establish the harsh rule of the war God Yahweh.

It just seems so obvious to me that the Bible is such a poor book to claim as being morally inspiring, let alone divinely inspired. I'm speaking of the book as a whole - yes there are some GREAT bits and the NT in particular was revolutionary in its charitable morality, but as a whole the book is about as horrible a moral guide as any in existence. If it is divinely inspired then God is not the character of God moderate Christians portray him to be.

[ConiectoErgoSum]

In light of your post, I admit fault in comparing the bible to the constitution. I failed in clarifying what aspects I was comparing. I was comparing the "long term record" aspect, not "book of rules" aspect. I could have chosen a better example.

I want to be clear that I really really don't think "The Bible" is a book of rules. Deuteronomy is a book of rules (in part). Exodus is a book of rules (also only in part). We refer to Paul's teachings to the early churches, and the rules he gave them. But I think Paul is rather explicit in saying that the law is no longer the standard to which we are held. Law is a useful reference. Law exposes sin. Sin does exist. There are things we should and should not do.

But the Christian teaching is not "follow the law". The bible is a collection of historical works that give us insight into God's nature... it's not a code book. God didn't hand it straight to us... a bunch of Christians got together years after all the works were written and decided which ones to include. There were many years of Christianity before the Bible even existed in its current form.

The bible cannot be read like a technical document. It's not the letter of the law, but he point of the story that matters. It can't really be summarized into "do this, and don't do that".

[Gone Apostate]

I want to be clear that I really really don't think "The Bible" is a book of rules. Deuteronomy is a book of rules (in part). Exodus is a book of rules (also only in part). We refer to Paul's teachings to the early churches, and the rules he gave them. But I think Paul is rather explicit in saying that the law is no longer the standard to which we are held. Law is a useful reference. Law exposes sin. Sin does exist. There are things we should and should not do.

I am glad to hear that you don’t consider the Bible to be a rule book. I wish more people felt the way you do. I wish I could leave it at that but I have to say one thing. I think that the vast majority of Christians do consider the Bible a rule book. One good way to graduate the spectrum from liberal Christian to extreme fundamentalist would be in units of what percentage of the Bible is to be taken seriously as a rule book. I think that you may not consider passages like “Thou shall not suffer a witch to live� key in your relationship with God but I bet there are some rules that you glean from the Bible - perhaps a baptismal mandate or a requirement that to gain eternal life you must surrender your life to Christ? These are rules too. Maybe your faith really and truly has no rules about how to interpret, express, communicate, or live your beliefs but that you make you a rare Christian indeed and if there are rules, I wonder where they come from if not the Bible.

Secondly on the issue of the character of God. I don’t know if He is a forgiving loving God or a vengeful jealous one. I’m sorry he can’t be both. What does that story of the Passover tell me about the Character of God, or the entire story of Lot. Or the hundreds (yes hundreds) of other injustices perpetuated either directly by God or at his instruction, throughout the Bible. We hear much more about the merciful loving and forgiving God in the New Testament but we also learn of the eternal torment of hell for disbelief.

But the Christian teaching is not "follow the law". The bible is a collection of historical works that give us insight into God's nature... it's not a code book. God didn't hand it straight to us... a bunch of Christians got together years after all the works were written and decided which ones to include. There were many years of Christianity before the Bible even existed in its current form.

I’m sorry but, if the Bible is to help us learn about the character of God then it fails at portraying a constant picture of him. If that is the fault of the men who wrote it then God’s system of divine inspiration doesn’t have much to recommend it. Either the inspiration fails or the people do, both of which are His design so…there’s that.

The Christians that wrote down the books or parts of the books of the New Testament were different people with a different God than the Jews that wrote the books or parts of the books of the Old. The Jews and the Christians that wrote their respective books were different from each other.

If the book is just a book with good and bad to take from the wisdom of the ages, I can live with and even recommend it in some ways. However if it is as even very liberal Christians believe, a communication from the Most High, Than I say the Most High is at best a deeply incompetent communicator, at worst a fundamentally flawed and horrific deity. Either way He in no way earns my respect let alone my worship.

The Bible is the single biggest liability to belief in the divinity of Christ, or of Yahweh, is my point.

Thanks again for your comments. I really wish more Christian were like you seem to be.

[RevSpecter]

Is the theory of evolution a threat to your faith? Why or why not?

No I am a progressive open theist Christian and believe that biblical time and chronological time are not one in the same. I think the years are more like ages, to make a long story short I subscribe to Behe’s, PhD, who wrote among many other books, the limits to evolution. As far as cosmology and other disciplines go I think that Gerald L. Schroeder, also a PhD, who wrote ‘The Science of God: The Convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom’ take(s) has the right idea about time and space etc. It’s also my belief that the bible was not a science text book but rather a divinely inspired manual of living right that touched on many the disciplines, science, philosophy, history, prophetic writings, poems and prose, practical advice of how have a personal relationship with God, to name a few.

(2) Are there any moral, spiritual lessons to be learned from Adam and Eve? How can we apply them today?

Yes many! Well this forum is a bit small to present all the lessons that are implied in the story of Adam and Eve, however the most important lesson of Adam and eve to me is that it’ is showing the emergence of man becoming human, knowing the difference between right and wrong in a spiritual level, rather than simply a human level.

(3) Do you believe in the concept of “Original Sin�. If so, how does it impact how you view the world?

I think that there was a tainting of our DNA and that the original sin was the introduction of this bad DNA. Hey, is your real name Richard Bozarth ? ~(just kidding) ~

(4) What, if anything, do feel it says about the character of God, or morality in general?

Nothing. IMO, God designed the universe to run on natural law

(5) If you believe the story to be a literal, historical account – what are your thoughts on the evidence/science that counters this understanding?

I think it’s a blend of literal along with parable etc.

(6) If you believe the story has some truth, if not literal, what do you consider it to be? An allegory – if so, of what?

(see above)

7) If you think the story has no historical validity, how would you describe its role/impact in our society? Would you like to see that role changed? How?

Christianity is healthy the way it exists. The ongoing and sometimes vicious debate between Christian fundamentalist, Liberals and the myriad middle class (and lets not forget the fringe groups) fuels research and discovery in a robust manner and keeps the religion healthy and in fighting form. This fighting form must be maintained at all costs because the foes of Christianity and religion are not slowing in their attacks in intensity or efficiency. However as a closing comment, I will say I see a very enheartening process that has been ongoing for the last twenty years, but recently been gaining momentum an trend of intellectualizing Christianity and this trend is expanding to even the once impenetrable fundamentalist Christians. That in and of itself, if successful is akin to the Manhattan project X-2!

RS

[RevSpecter]

NMSquirrel, great discussion between you and Mr Gone Apostate! You were very 'biblical' and displayed compassion and grace as did Mr Apostate. Very nice and the way debate should be done!

RS