Catholic Cardinal Says Adam and Eve Didn’t Exist

by His Excellency 31 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  mP

  @cofty

  Its abnout loyalty. If you are of another religion then its very likely you will take instruction from the head of that religion. In the crusades, muslims remained loyal to their side because their religious leaders told them so. The same was true of the christians. Putting the fear of some god into people has been a very effective manipulation tool since the beginning of time.

  The BIble is exactly the same. Think of the two brothers, Moses and Aaron against the sons of Korah(???). Both wanted to worship Jehovah, but M & A were pissed because they didnt want to lose thier power and privilege.
• 

  truthseeker

  The problem with not believing in Adam and Eve is at some point in Earth's distant past, there had to be a only a handful of people living at the time just to procreate.

  So how many couples were there? Or was there just one couple, Adam and Eve? And if there is no Adam and Eve, how can it be said that Jesus descended from Adam given the genealogical account in Luke?

  This reasoning completly destroys the need for a Messiah and hence Christianity is just another road to nowhere.
• 

  adamah

  Truthseeker says-

  The problem with not believing in Adam and Eve is at some point in Earth's distant past, there had to be a only a handful of people living at the time just to procreate.

  Statements like that strongly suggest you're likely not aware of basic principles of genetics which needed to understand human evolution, since the actual story is a bit more complex than "God Dun It!".

  There is no need for ONLY one pair to create a new species (founder effect). In fact, a new species resulting from a single breeding pair IS possible, but it's a risky situation (due to the 'population bottlenecking' of the gene pool; it takes a long time for the gene pool to 'fan out' and recover in order to slowly increasing the species' resistance to various threats that may drive the species extinct by a single challenge, whether a genetic disease or an external challenge like a virus/bacteria, etc).

  In the past, conservationists didn't think about the loss of genetic diversity in species, and would rejoice when they managed to save a single breeding pair of a species from the brink of extinction. Then they realized that what is actually lost is the genetic diversity of the species, which means that the odds of survival goes down since the species literally is genetically "putting all of their eggs in one basket".

  (The wikipedia page above on population bottlenecking uses the example of the Northern Elephant Seal)

  "So how many couples were there? Or was there just one couple, Adam and Eve?

  That seemingly simple question would require an essay, and even then, it takes YEARS of study in biology to get up to speed:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

  You didn't understand the Bible overnight, so you can't expect a miracle of being filled with "Scientific Holy Spirit" to help you learn the much-more complex story of life on the planet in a short period.

  BTW, I don't expect you will find the story of hominid evolution as emotionally satisfying, since it's not as cozy as "God Dun It!"; hence why 80% of Americans choose to cling to creationism despite MOUNTAINS of evidence. For lay-people, it's not about logic, but about being conscious of their "spiritual (emotional) needs" and let the scientific evidence be damned.

  And if there is no Adam and Eve, how can it be said that Jesus descended from Adam given the genealogical account in Luke?"

  Maybe you would like to explain why the Bible in Matthew and Luke offers TWO geneologies for Jesus, which are quite different (with one seemingly driven by a matrilineal vs patrilineal geneology, since remember: Jesus supposedly was conceived by His Father in Heaven via Holy Spirit (immaculate conception)? So why should Joseph's (his stepfather's) lineage even matter, unless Luke was trying to fit a square peg into a round hole)?

  If you're a Christian, you owe it to yourself to read some books by Bart Ehrman: he's a theology graduate and New testament scholar and professor who has authored many different books that point out the logical inconsistencies in the New Testament.

  This reasoning completly destroys the need for a Messiah and hence Christianity is just another road to nowhere.

  And thus joining the ranks of a LONG TRADITION of theologically-driven beliefs based on man's desires: it's not the first, and it definitely won't be the last since many people typically prefer a comforting fantasy over stone-cold sober reality: they cherry-pick what they WANT to believe, even DESPITE evidence. Hence why there's STILL a Flat Earth Society, even in this day and age of satellites orbiting the Earth, moon shots, etc.

  Adamah
• 

  Band on the Run

  Cofty is correct. Fundamentalism did not exist for countless generations. It is a recent view of the Bible. During the Renaissance, the popes and theologians incorporated Greek and Latin myths and beliefs into Christianity. I doubt there has ever been a single pope who believed it literally.

  The Church taught that humans needed the church to explain scripture. Protestants claimed all they needed was the Bible. Even today, few Christians ever wonder what Jesus and the apostles were raised to believe. There is no need to know first century culture and beliefs. Christian history is unncessary.

  I do believe that reading the Bible itself reveals much. Present day Christianity has a hatred towards knowledge and complexity of any kind.

  I was taught when I converted that Jesus is only one way. Through circumstance, Jesus is the tradition for people of European descent. There is no belief that Buddhists, Confucianist, Hindus do not have their own path to God. No one is to be denied communion ever. Travel a few miles and such beliefs drive people crazy.
• 

  Vidiot

  Band on the Run - "Fundamentalism did not exist for countless generations. It is a recent view of the Bible."

  Yup.

  Some historians think it may even be an unexpected byproduct of the Enlightenment.
• 

  rmt1

  Clear evidence of Satan at work.

  http://www.proprofs.com/flashcards/upload/q8660848.jpg

  https://wh2012mikedevinluke.wikispaces.com/file/view/newton_1.gif/297500202/newton_1.gif
• 

  mP

  Band on the Run - "Fundamentalism did not exist for countless generations. It is a recent view of the Bible."

  mP:

  Of course it has always existed. People have been fighting because their religion is the right one or because their king or priest tells them their god wants them too. Is that not a fundamentalist ?
• 

  5go

  TJ - If Adam and Eve did not exist, what is the need of the redemption of Jesus ( according to the Scriptures )?

  TJ you are assuming Jesus was sent here to redeem sin. He might of been sent to point out sin never existed in the first place. Christian leaders needed something to control reenterduced sin years after his death saying Jesus got rid of sin and then concocted the whole mess up about original sin. Which explains why Jews know/knew nothing of original sin despite being the religion christianity was based on. According to the Jewish tradtion you are not born into sin from Adam that comes later in life. Jews believe a man can be upright and not sin if he so chooses just no one has. That is probally where the whole sinless Jesus thing got started BTW. Some old church teachings state becuase Jesus was blameless he was adopted as a son by god not being so until his baptism and then given the Kingship of David and he was not in heaven before his birth nor was his mother a virgin. That stuff was added later to impress the Greeks.
• 

  mP

  Jesus was sent to tell the jews to stop rebelling and be good slaves. This is the enduring message of the gospels, that is repeated over and over again. The claim about sin is total crap and not scripturally based.
• 

  *lost*

  the term 'fundamentalism' entered the English language in 1922, and is often capitalised when referring to the religious movement.

  Fundamentalism came from multiple streams in British and American theology of the 19th century.

  Fundamental -

  forming a necessary base or core

  of central importance

  A central or primary rule or principle on which something is based

  Fundamentalism

  is the demand for a strict adherence to orthodox theological doctrines

  usually understood as a reaction against modernist theology, primarily to promote continuity and accuracy.

  the term ''fundamentalism'' was origionally coined by it's supporters to describe five specific classic theological beliefs of christianity,

  and that developed into a movement within the protestant community of the UNITED STATES in the early part of the 20th century,

  and had it's roots in the fundamentalist-modernist controversy of that time.

  the term usually has a religious connotation indicating unwavering attachment to a set of irreducible beliefs.

  Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, Non-religious, Atheist.

  interesting scripture

  Colossians 2:13-23

  wonder what jw's say about that.