I sympathize with anyone trying to make sense out of the Genesis stories. Or perhaps condolences would be more appropriate? This is not just jumping through hoops, it’s jumping over men and horses, hoops and garters, lastly through a hogshead of real fire.
1 Like
What are you saying here? It sounds really, unnecessarily, condescending. Am I missing something?
1 Like
Not at all. It’s always a pleasure to search through the Scriptures and explore their meaning. I haven’t experienced the kind of thing you’re describing.
2 Likes
Im merely referring to @cdods not yet having the lion’s share of background discussions that address the full range of his concerns.
Nothing @cdods has listed so far is a new issue… we just need to get him to the right threads so that he can be satisfied that someone has thought through each concern he mentions.
I’m aware that I am. There’s lots of good discussion that happened back in the earlier days of Peaceful Science that I wasn’t around for. I’m making my way through it slowly, but I’ve decided it’s probably easier to wait for Josh’s book than find my answers in earlier posts. It’s why for the most part I’ve held off asking too many questions.
Obviously a lot hinges on the definition of “image of God”. I’ve got lots of questions there, and want to see answers based on solid biblical scholarship, before I’ll be comfortable, but again I think it’s easier to wait for the book to see what it answers, then go from there.
I’ve spent 20 years caught unable to fully reconcile theology and science, waiting a few more months for Josh’s book won’t be too hard.
2 Likes
The image of God is one of the puzzle pieces. Whats amazing is that Genealogical Adam fits any interpretation you like…
Gen 1 mentions it, but not Gen 2 with the holy couple.
And Gen 9 mentions it again… with all the survivors of the Earth… including maternal lines which we know nothing about.
There’s really nothing difficult triggered at any point by image of God discussions.
I don’t think it’s quite that easy. But lunch is over, and I need to get back to work, so I’ll have to leave there for now.
1 Like
I look forward to reading what you think nobody has already pitched at “Geneal.Adam” regarding the image of God. The collective discussion group has been at this for a while… but there’s always room for a brand new angle to be discussed…
I tend to side with @swamidass on this point. In my experience, most Christians who reject macro-evolution do so because of theological reasons, not scientific ones. If you take away one of the major theological hurdles, then it may clear the way for accepting the science in many cases, but certainly not all of them. How many Christians who reject evolution know the difference between a synonymous and non-synonymous mutations, or the difference between a substitution and an indel? I’m guessing not many. However, they do know about original sin, that I am sure of.
2 Likes
I’d just add that my goal is not to convince everyone evolution is true. Instead, if we solve the Adam and Eve problem, for the vast majority of Christians macro evolution just won’t matter any more. Origins advocacy groups, almost by definitions, will be locked in eternal battle, but most of us just won’t care the outcome.
2 Likes
Perhaps a better way to put it…most of will be content to move on from their version of hell, perpetual conflict on non-essential details.
1 Like
I’ll be very curious your take on the book.
I’m looking forward to reading it. When do you expect it to be available?
1 Like
12/10 release date. Pre orders will ship early.
1 Like