[I aint no monkey]

Originally Posted by Arthur Brain

To be fair it's rather rare, and it's usually implied that if one doesn't believe the Genesis account to be literal then one disbelieves God by association and salvation is in doubt because of it. It's only a tiny minority of such who are so vociferous on the matter however...

I think it is universally agreed that if you don't think you need a savior then you can't get saved. If the Genesis narrative isn't true does man need a savior? If there wasn't a fall or original sin, why did Jesus have to die?

[Arthur Brain]

Originally Posted by I aint no monkey

I think it is universally agreed that if you don't think you need a savior then you can't get saved. If the Genesis narrative isn't true does man need a savior? If there wasn't a fall or original sin, why did Jesus have to die?

Well, if that were the case there'd be no such thing as universalists ironically enough, and it's not about Genesis 'not being true' but rather reading it allegorically.

[Yazichestvo]

Originally Posted by Arthur Brain

Well, if that were the case there'd be no such thing as universalists ironically enough, and it's not about Genesis 'not being true' but rather reading it allegorically.

To me, it always seemed implict that these stories weren't literal. It reminds me of when another (Traditio) started talking about how there's no place like Valhalla or Asgard on Earth, therefore it doesn't exist. Maybe that seems off-topic, but well, there's no Eden on Earth either;

Clearly we are talking about some other world or state of existence. Whenever you have the assumption that something isn't taking place in a world like ours, then images like "tree of knowledge" or a "serpent" are clearly being used to represent something otherworldly with a more familiar, worldly symbol that we can comprehend.

[I aint no monkey]

Originally Posted by Yazichestvo

To me, it always seemed implict that these stories weren't literal. It reminds me of when another (Traditio) started talking about how there's no place like Valhalla or Asgard on Earth, therefore it doesn't exist. Maybe that seems off-topic, but well, there's no Eden on Earth either;

Clearly we are talking about some other world or state of existence. Whenever you have the assumption that something isn't taking place in a world like ours, then images like "tree of knowledge" or a "serpent" are clearly being used to represent something otherworldly with a more familiar, worldly symbol that we can comprehend.

Here I am trying to remove the philosophy and imagination from the science of evolution and people keep injecting more. My job will never be done.

[Arthur Brain]

Originally Posted by I aint no monkey

Here I am trying to remove the philosophy and imagination from the science of evolution and people keep injecting more. My job will never be done.

Except you can't remove what isn't there. Science is concerned with fact and testable theory and hypothesis. Philosophy has absolutely zero to do with evolutionary theory or any other branch of science for that matter....

[ThermalCry]

If by 'Imagination' you mean the FACT the the Earth is billions, not thousands, of years old ... then ok.

[The Barbarian]

As you see, the major difficulty YECs have with evolution is understanding what it is, and how evolutionary theory describes it.

Aren't many who can explain even the bare bones of Darwin's theory, and almost none of them know what the evidence for it (or even against it) might be.

[ThermalCry]

Originally Posted by I aint no monkey

I think it is universally agreed that if you don't think you need a savior then you can't get saved. If the Genesis narrative isn't true does man need a savior? If there wasn't a fall or original sin, why did Jesus have to die?

As far as theology is concerned, The Fall story could be analogous to each individual human's desire and straying from God. It could simply be stating that we all, very early in life, make decisions that effectively get us kicked out of 'eden'. There are so many more elegant ways to interpret Genesis, a literal reading is probably the most brash, forced, and pointlessly archaic way to read that particular block of scripture.

[Meatball]

Originally Posted by The Barbarian

As you see, the major difficulty YECs have with evolution is understanding what it is, and how evolutionary theory describes it.

Aren't many who can explain even the bare bones of Darwin's theory, and almost none of them know what the evidence for it (or even against it) might be.

Agreed. I recently attended a Sigma Xi conference titled "Why Evolution is True".

The speaker impressed me, showing how the facts and pieces of evidence he presented resulted with no conflict with the Bible..
Assuming you don't find the age of the Earth written in the text.

Your interpretation of the evidence is widely determined by your philosophy. Whenever he says, "Common Ancestor", it can just as easily be drawn as "Common Designer" by me, and we have no conflict in what we see in nature.

Its the reasons why these things occur, are what separate the science writer, and the Christian physics student.

He fully explained, and debunked the myths and misunderstandings that I and many others have held concerning the dreaded evolution.

It turns out, its not really such a big deal. We need to continue to grade evolution as an area of study, by making sure it remains a scientific endeavor.

Evolution isn't really what many people make it out to be.

I don't agree with the conclusions drawn from many of the primate fossils found, linking them to both humans and monkeys. I don't agree with the reasons why they say this happens. And I don't agree with how they assert it started. But hey, that's abiogenesis. A different topic.

Originally Posted by ThermalCry

As far as theology is concerned, The Fall story could be analogous to each individual human's desire and straying from God. It could simply be stating that we all, very early in life, make decisions that effectively get us kicked out of 'eden'. There are so many more elegant ways to interpret Genesis, a literal reading is probably the most brash, forced, and pointlessly archaic way to read that particular block of scripture.

That desire to stray from God had to start with the first man and woman. No Adam and Eve, no fall to begin with. It IS a mysterious book. Perhaps THE most mysterious book of the Bible, but for some reason, it still portrays a Creator who creates from outside a time of space that already exist. You will find that such a characteristic is very unique when comparing Genesis with religious creation stories.