Curious what theologians throughout history made of Genesis 4

Re: my motivation
I imagine my motivation is much the same as @swamidass and the rest of this community.

Re: my statements about errors in the bible
You’re making way too much of these statements. I was just simply warning against the assumption that the bible is the direct word of God. That’s a dangerous (and baseless) assumption.

It’s clearly man-made. If humans were involved at any point, a healthy dose of skepticism is in order.

Re: my handstands and flash powder throwing
I’m really not. You and everyone else here already have preconceived ideas about these passages, so getting you or anyone to see any of it differently can be challenging.

@Jeremy_Christian

As i said before… you are unwilling to change ANY part of your scenario… even parts that are purely optional, and which cause more problems than they solve.

Here is my proof:

Do you honestly think Genealogical Adam scenarios will ever include the theme that Genesis 1 is actually an accurate timeline of the rise of life on Earth?

Do you think these interpretations of yours are going to fly with @swamidass?

As odd as your metaphysics might be… your contempt for modern science is quite evident… unless - - rather than contempt - - it is an overly active imagination that is at work here.

Well, considering Hugh Ross laid out a very similar explanation regarding Genesis 1, I’d say yes to both counts.

In the hypothesis I’m putting forth, the creation account is an important piece of that. It sets up the rest of the story that follows.

@Jeremy_Christian,

You are weaving fantasy science into incomprehensible metaphysics.

But … your music has a good beat and so its easy to dance to it.

@Jeremy_Christian

Joshus hasnt adopted any of those positions… so why are you suggesting that Joshua has or will?

Is @swamidass and PeacefulScience not affiliated with Hugh Ross?

Affiliated? They have each other’s phone numbers.

They sure dont share budgets…
What are you talking about?

I was under the impression that Geneologial Adam came from Ross. Is that wrong?

@Jeremy_Christian

Well… yeah. Way wrong.

Joshua developed something distinctly different from Ross. If he hadnt…we would be debating jim at Ross’ group…

1 Like

Ah, my mistake.

Is there anywhere I can go to read up and inform myself as to what exactly is what?

@Jeremy_Christian

So now do you see why the premises for your scenario do not match the premises for @swamidass’ scenarios?

What the…

Boy, you are surrounded by it… go to the Website portion of the .org… there are basic articles…

1 Like

No, because we’re still talking about Adam being created in an already populated world.

Considering this didn’t happen in a vacuum, it has to be determined what’s significant about Adam and how exactly these events tie into human history.

@Jeremy_Christian

And YOUR way is in a different way, with fewer touch points with science.

1 Like

From what I can tell, your perception that there are fewer touch points has everything to do with you not yet grasping my claim.

Besides, it seems the lion share of touch points in @swamidass’s view are genetic evidence based. Considering my view shares those same points, any additional touch points my view adds increases my total higher. If we’re keeping score.

@Jeremy_Christian I’m fairly surprised at how unaware you are if the basics here. You are deviating wildly from what is sensible scientifically, and seem to be just guessing what the GAE is doing.

@gbrooks9 is right here. This is not the RTB model. We are not affiliated with Ross.

Have you read the key articles on the GAE yet?

Unless I misunderstand, the fundamental key of it is summed up here … " Entirely consistent with the genetic evidence, it is possible Adam was created out of dust, and Eve out of his rib, less than 10,000 years ago in a divinely created garden where God might dwell with them, the first beings with opportunity to be in a relationship with Him. Perhaps their fall brought accountability for sin to all their descendants. Leaving the Garden, their offspring blended with their neighbors 1 in the surrounding towns. In this way, they became genealogical ancestors of all those in recorded history. Adam and Eve, here, are the single-couple progenitors2 of all mankind."

That is the teaser. There a is a great deal of detail that you are missing. You may need to catch up.

I should also emphasize that you don’t have to win my approval or agree with me. There is no “reservation” to which you must stick. Id just suggest you understand what is being put forward by others.

Admittedly, the impression I have gotten a number of times is that when it’s perceived that I am venturing too far from your model, the swamidass police often come swooping in. So I often feel it necessary to justify my reasoning and to draw comparisons to show what I’m saying is aligned so I don’t get escorted out by security.