quote:

---

Moses wrote Genesis. But that's besides the point (as well as the OT geneaologies ignored). The question is, at which generation in the geneaologies does it move from myth to reality?

An accurate geneaolgy, no matter how mundane, has some importance to it. But what use is a mythic geneaology?

If the geneaology used to prove the veracity of Jesus' claim to the throne of David is mythic, that's another reason to reject the claim that they killed the correct Messiah. for example

---

quote:

---

It's true the geneaology from David to Jesus could be accurate but if you herald the falsity of the geneaology from Adam to Abraham to David, wouldn't it be suspect from David to Jesus as well?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MephEternal
YES, the genealogy from David to Jesus COULD be accurate. As for your epistemological question, see again the argument against this line of reasoning seen for the doctrine of inerrancy. It's the same search for psychological certainty. Just because SOME things might be wrong doesn't mean that EVERYTHING'S wrong. Check out the argument again.

---

quote:

---

My initial instinct is to re-consider how I've been interpretting those scriptures. Since I believe that all scripture is God-breathed, I of course expect that all scripture will not contradict itself. So if there is an apparent contradiction, I must be off on my interpretation of one or the other or both.

So... what happens when we try this: those NT passages are intended to be describing our spiritual condition, not necessarily our physical condition?

---

quote:

---

I believe we have inherited physical depravity as a consequence of the Sin of Adam, though spiritual depravity/death is something that is entered into voluntarily.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MephEternal

The only genealogy that uses Adam in the New Testament is in Luke 3. It ultimately stems from Genesis. Question for you: When was Genesis "written"?

Hint: Think "post-exilic"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MephEternal

JEE:

quote:

---

I believe we have inherited physical depravity as a consequence of the Sin of Adam, though spiritual depravity/death is something that is entered into voluntarily.

---

Oh...so you believe in a literal Adam through which physical death came?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mayflower

.
Mephi wrote:

quote:

---

Are we all LIBERALS yet? Whohooooo!

---

Three cheers for the blue states! (Oh, oh. Watch out for the snowballs!)


Peace & blessings,
<><

---

quote:

---

I find it rather difficult to believe you're so concrete in your thinking that you can't accept this as a reasonable view of Genesis.

---

quote:

---

One approach to this issue is to examine how the New Testament views Adam. It is true that the word Adam may be taken as a general or class term ("human") rather than a proper name. However, in two passages, Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15, Paul relates human sinfulness to Adam in a way that makes it difficult to regard "Adam" as merely a representative term. In Romans 5:12-21 Paul refers several times to the trespass of "one man." He also refers to the obedience, grace, and righteousness of "the one man, Jesus Christ." Paul is drawing a parallel between the one man Adam and the one man Jesus Christ. Note that the negative side of Paul's doctrinal exposition rests on the facticity of Adam. Sin, guilt, and death are universal facts of human existence; they are essential parts of Paul's doctrine of humanity. Paul explains that all humans die because sin came into the world through one person. Death is a manifestation of the condemnation resulting from one human's sin. It is difficult indeed to conclude anything other than that Paul believed that Adam was a particular person who committed a sin significant for the rest of the human race.

In 1 Corinthians 15 Paul's position becomes even more evident. Here, he says that death came by a man (v21), and then makes clear (v.22) that he is referring to Adam. In verse 45 Paul distinctly refers to "the first man Adam." If one understand the word Adam always to mean "human," there is something of a redundancy here, to say the very least. It seems clear enough that Paul thought of Adam as a real, historical person.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JEE

Not saying Paul himself would've thought of it that way; just saying that us interpreting the story of Adam as an allegory doesn't require us to reject Paul's basic line of reasoning in the juxtaposition of Adam and Christ.

John[/font=Book Antiqua][/size=3]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JET

quote:

---

Originally posted by JEE

Not saying Paul himself would've thought of it that way; just saying that us interpreting the story of Adam as an allegory doesn't require us to reject Paul's basic line of reasoning in the juxtaposition of Adam and Christ.

John

---

But Mehp's question, if I understand correctly, is are you willing to come out and just say, unequivically, that Paul was WRONG to the extent he believed that physical death resulted from a literal Adamic fall?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JEE
I don't think the assumption has been proven that the Pauline passages Meph is referring to necessarily are speaking of physical death resulting from Adam.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JET

Clearly at least one author of Genesis believed in a literal Adamic fall.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JET

12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned– 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

JEE,

Isn't Paul arguing that the existence of physical death between Adam and Moses proves that sin was "in the world" even prior to the law?

---

The verse doesn't seem to me to say precisely what kind of death Paul is referring to. I think spiritual death makes much more sense in the context of Romans. "The wages of sin is (spiritual) death." If the wages of sin is physical death," then it seems we must say that little babies who die have somehow sinned, or have somehow "inherited" sin (which the Bible to the contrary everywhere calls an ACT) and thus these infants have received (but not earned) the wages of the sin they somehow inherited. In other words, we are right back into Augustinian determinism, with God condemning infants to hell because of Adam's sin.



Inasmuch as all people follow Adam in choosing to sin sometime in their lives, it would of course be true that (spiritual) death reigned from Adam to Moses. Did people all of the sudden stop dying physically after Moses gave the Law?

John

quote:

---

Originally posted by JEE

quote:

---

Originally posted by JET

12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned– 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

JEE,

Isn't Paul arguing that the existence of physical death between Adam and Moses proves that sin was "in the world" even prior to the law?

---

[size=3][font=Book Antiqua]
The verse doesn't seem to me to say precisely what kind of death Paul is referring to. I think spiritual death makes much more sense in the context of Romans. "The wages of sin is (spiritual) death." If the wages of sin is physical death," then it seems we must say that little babies who die have somehow sinned, or have somehow "inherited" sin (which the Bible to the contrary everywhere calls an ACT) and thus these infants have received (but not earned) the wages of the sin they somehow inherited. In other words, we are right back into Augustinian determinism, with God condemning infants to hell because of Adam's sin.



Inasmuch as all people follow Adam in choosing to sin sometime in their lives, it would of course be true that (spiritual) death reigned from Adam to Moses.

---

quote:

---

Did people all of the sudden stop dying physically after Moses gave the Law?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selah

Hi JET,

I haven't had time to catch up (and I can't stay long) but I see you're saying you agree with Meph and Erickson. Would you please summarize what you're agreeing with them on exactly? Thanks for your help.

love
selah

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JET
12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned– 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.


It seems to me that Paul is trying to prove that "all sinned" (v. 12). How can he prove this? Adam clearly sinned because he broke a command (re. the tree). Those who have the law (Moses and later) sinned becasue they also broke a command (the law given to Moses). But what about the people in between? How does Paul prove they sinned? Because death reigned. Now, if he was talking about spiritual death, how would that prove his point? How do you prove that "spiritual death" reigned? But if he's talking about physical death, it makes perfect sense. The existence of physical death between Adam and Moses is obvious. Hence, Paul has proven his point.

---