Does the Christian message fall apart without a literal interpretation of Genesis?

by nicolaou 175 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  trevor

  If I chose to be a Christian, I would have to accept the Genesis account as true and literal. Why? Because according to the bible, Jesus came to earth to be tortured to death to atone, or compensate, for Adams fall from grace. Adam has to be believed as real if Jesus is to be believed as real. To my knowledge, no bible writer has ever expressed an opinion different to that which I have stated above.

  To me the account of Adam and Eve is a mythical tale, a fable, a story with a moral. All religions have them. Not being a follower of Christ I am at liberty to smile and walk on by.

  Tammy, I understand your desire to make sense of your belief in Jesus and admire your tenacity. I hope that it lasts you a lifetime and continues to bring you comfort. I wish you well but my concern is that you are too smart and inquiring to debate with people on this forum indefinitely without the penny dropping. Replacing such faith and hope as you have is not easy.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  trevor

  Because according to the bible, Jesus came to earth to be tortured to death to atone, or compensate, for Adams fall...

  That's right... According to the New testament. That could also be said if Adam was merely simbolic, representing ALL human kind (I wouldn't say that, but, some actualy do).
• 

  tec

  Trevor, please do not worry about me. I am not trying to 'make sense' of my faith. The sense is already there, at least for me. I am not grasping at straws, desperate or panicky. I am perfectly calm and at peace with my faith. The lack of sense comes in when something is being seen that is not there. And I am just as much at a loss to understand why you (and others who believe as you do), cannot see what I see... as you are about my inability to see what you see. And I'm sorry, but I do feel that what you are seeing is just what others have taught you to see; even though you know that what they taught is wrong.

  Not once does Christ say, in the bible, that he came to atone for Adam's sin. Not once does he even mention it. He does however say this:

  "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

  Sins plural. Not redemption for Adam's sin. Forgiveness for many people and their sins.

  That is also the theme that other writers continue with... forgiveness of our sins. (those of us who do sin) The rest - this ransom sacrifice - is a theology based on a couple paragraphs of one person - Paul - and not supported by Christ, himself - and it could easily mean something other than what some men have interpreted it as to suit their doctrine.

  I know you hope for good for me, Trevor. I hope the same for you, and I respect the compassion and sincerity you show as a person, regardless of whether someone shares your views or not.

  Tammy
• 

  nicolaou

  The lack of sense comes in when something is being seen that is not there.

  Wow! How unaware of one's own position does a believer need to be to in order to make that statement?!
• 

  tec

  Is that all you have to say about anything I said in the post before, Nic? Does it have to be about me, or can it be about what I said in response to your original question?
• 

  Curtains

  I think Jesus Christ really excels if we take his teachings and example to mean how Tammy interpets it. In this interpretation we can then see Jesus as being way ahead of the game in that he actually set people free. Much very advanced philosophical thinking from the period did not. (edit: okay advanced philosophical thinking to me anyway)

  edit: this is true even if we take an atheistic perspective on Jesus Christ
• 

  Curtains

  hey I'm not a thread killer!!!

  I vote we get ourselves a drink
• 

  unshackled

  Curtains...here I'll be the thread killer. No one has ordered from the Nutty Atonement Tree anyways....thought they'd sell like hotcakes.
• 

  nicolaou

  Is that all you have to say about anything I said in the post before, Nic? Does it have to be about me, or can it be about what I said in response to your original question?

  Fair enough Tammy, that was a bit 'snappy'.

  Jesus said; Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. Matt 5:17

  This Law, according to Hebrews 10:1 was 'a shadow of the good things that are coming'. That good thing being Jesus Christ, a sacrifice superior to that of animals which were unable to take away sins. (Heb 10:4).

  Deputy Dog already shared a relevant quote from Romans but it bears repeating;

  Rom 5:12
  
  Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-- 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.

  also,

  Rom 7:25

  Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.

  You are correct Tammy, there are lots of things Jesus did not make pronouncements upon but he himself said that he came to fulfil this Law.
• 

  trevor

  Ah -Tammy, What are we to do with you? Thank you for your kind comments.

  I must back away now and leave you to defend your beliefs. No doubt, doing so strengthens your faith and makes you feel closer to Jesus. I truly hope he exists. Such love and devotion should not be wasted.

  Tread carefully.