On facebook, I stated my concern regarding Walton’s stance on the historical Adam and Eve. I am troubled he makes these statements without support, whereas nearly every other statement he makes is supported by well-reasoned logic. There is a fallacious danger in not reading ahead as one does “read throughs,” so I have at least skipped ahead to see if Walton does give his reasons. He does, in Proposition 11. Yet, I am on Proposition 8, with only the point-of-fact statements “Adam was a real person” made in the midst of “don’t take anything else as ‘literal’.”1 He tries to
I am not a Calvinist, nor one who believes in St. Augustine’s error. Rather, I believe we can theologically explain the transmitted nature of sin better. However, in reading a particular book, the federal headship view was mentioned (sort of). I wanted to invite consideration and thoughts: Transgression of the covenant commandment would result in death. Adam chose the course of disobedience, corrupted himself by sin, became guilty in the sight of God, and as such subject to the sentence of death. And because he was the federal representative of the race, his disobedience affected all his descendants. In His
Sort of …. it is going on here. This is my latest, fastest comment: First, Jesus isn’t clearly saying anything. Read Paul Ricoeur about figurative language. Second, let’s say Jesus said that Moses is whom the Jews trusted. Do you notice the play on rhetoric there? Let’s break down that passage. Does Jesus ever say that Moses wrote the Torah? No. What does Jesus specifically given to Moses? He gives the Law. The Law is not the Torah but contained therein. Now, regarding Exodus. Sure. Fine. You got me Except… Deuteronomy says that the sabbath is for… 5.12 “Observe the
Shaun posted this morning a link to DeYoung’s original post, and others have picked up on it as well. Scripture doesn’t have the same concept of history as recent innovations in the West does. Yes, Theology and History go hand in hand in Scripture, or perhaps, ideology and history as we can tell from the Chronicler (Fox News) and the Deuteronomist (BBC); however, just as ideology is shaped to fit certain things and theology is often times abstract, history in Scripture follows the same mold. DeYoung and others do not understand why or how the ancient writers would mimic other
Yeah… a lot of good stuff in this parody – Our contention with you rests firmly in your statement, “The moment you say, we have to abandon this theology in order to have the respect of the world, you end up with neither biblical orthodoxy, nor the respect of the world.” In the midst of all of this you have forgotten the love of God. Your contention is with biblical orthodoxy and respect of the world, neither of which Jesus ever commanded. Associated Baptist Press – Opinion: A letter from Adam And Eve.
Statements like this – all the gospel will be lost if – has been uttered and repeated time and time again when those entrenched against new information cannot handle it and create fear scenarios . Dr. Mohler writes, Thus, the denial of a historical Adam means that we would have to tell the Bible’s story in a very different way than the church has told it for centuries as the Bible has been read, taught, preached, and believed. If there is no historical Adam, then the Bible’s metanarrative is not Creation-Fall-Redemption-New Creation, but something very different. … If we
From here. I am so tired of these statements which are not supported by either biblical genre or logic