An atheist's opinion about Adam and Eve

[theophilus]

Christians sometimes discuss the question of whether or not there was a literal Adam and Eve and whether it makes any difference. Here is a quote from and atheist forum which shows what one atheist thinks about this subject.

The thing I find so funny is how often believers will play the allegory card and not ponder the implications if the story isn't true. The other day, my wife said that she really doesn't care whether the Adam and Eve story is true or not. I couldn't help but point out that if the story isn't true and original sin is BS, then there is no need for atonement and therefore the entire christian religion implodes. She had no response. I just can't imagine how she can't see that she essentially refuted her own faith. Nor is she even close to the first person I have heard that from.

[Storyteller]

Unless Adam and Eve is just a way of explaining and demonstrating original sin.

[SoCalExile]

Unless Adam and Eve is just a way of explaining and demonstrating original sin.

Then you get into the issue of God creating sin and flawed man.

[Storyteller]

Unless Adam and Eve is just a way of explaining and demonstrating original sin.

Then you get into the issue of God creating sin and flawed man.

Not necessarily. God created man with free will, man thought he knew best and rebelled against God, thus creating sin. Maybe.
I am thinking on my feet here (which is pretty difficult with a broken ankle )

[Philip]

That atheist swerved very close to the Truth - no Adam and Eve/false story or myth - no sin problem (that impacts eternity), no Savior needed, and most of the rest of Scripture makes absolutely no sense - INCLUDING the part where Jesus endorsed ALL of the books of The Law and The Prophets as being God-given. Oops!

[Kurieuo]

Christians sometimes discuss the question of whether or not there was a literal Adam and Eve and whether it makes any difference. Here is a quote from and atheist forum which shows what one atheist thinks about this subject.

The thing I find so funny is how often believers will play the allegory card and not ponder the implications if the story isn't true. The other day, my wife said that she really doesn't care whether the Adam and Eve story is true or not. I couldn't help but point out that if the story isn't true and original sin is BS, then there is no need for atonement and therefore the entire christian religion implodes. She had no response. I just can't imagine how she can't see that she essentially refuted her own faith. Nor is she even close to the first person I have heard that from.

I'm not convinced by the most extreme position on "original sin" -- that we're each totally depraved and sinful and therefore each deserving of death without Christ even in utero.

Rather, I believe humanity fell as a race, whether that was through Adam and Eve or some more metaphorical representation of humanity like Theistic Evolutionary proponents would hold to.

So God judged humanity in total as a race, the heads of which had "waged war" against Him. So all human offspring born into the "human camp" now carry that stigma, which as we grow up and live our lives is verified over and over again that we just in our human nature turn away from God, insult Him and go against Him... indeed bury knowledge of God. The OT and history of Israel, their story, accentuates this point over and over. How disloyal they/we are to God, and yet God persists with us, remains steadfast and faithful to humanity at large, and finds a way -- via the Messiah, the Christ.

Yet, so long as we carry the imago dei, there is goodness in us. We're not all totally depraved.
I disagree with 5-point Calvinist doctrine here and total depravity. If God desires us, and we're totally depraved, then God desires total depravity.
Such just doesn't make logical sense to me.

But, to the original question of Adam and Eve, I do believe all living people today descended from one human couple.
Certainly, I can see alternatives if one chooses to loosen the reigns on Scripture which still keep in with more popular and loose forms of "original sin".

Further, I'm always bemused by those who advocate evolution and raise this argument.
I mean seriously, if we are all descended from a common bacterial ancestor, somehow genetic diversity finds a way... right? Or as Jurassic Park movie states, "Life finds a way." And then we turn to a male-female couple, which does seem logical, and say "No way! You ignoramus Bible believing fools!" -- there's not enough genetic diversity in a human couple alone.
Well, once there was zero genetic diversity right? So arguments that we can't possibly share a common ancestor, due to a lack of genetic diversity seems almost like a cheeky argument. Even an argument from ignorance, like the kind many who believe in a common evolutionary ancestor often accuse ex nihilo creationists of making against natural evolution not being possible due to irreducible complexity and the like. Ironic that a similar line of argument is made then against those who believe in a literal Adam and Eve.

[abelcainsbrother]

Christians sometimes discuss the question of whether or not there was a literal Adam and Eve and whether it makes any difference. Here is a quote from and atheist forum which shows what one atheist thinks about this subject.

The thing I find so funny is how often believers will play the allegory card and not ponder the implications if the story isn't true. The other day, my wife said that she really doesn't care whether the Adam and Eve story is true or not. I couldn't help but point out that if the story isn't true and original sin is BS, then there is no need for atonement and therefore the entire christian religion implodes. She had no response. I just can't imagine how she can't see that she essentially refuted her own faith. Nor is she even close to the first person I have heard that from.

I'm not convinced by the most extreme position on "original sin" -- that we're each totally depraved and sinful and therefore each deserving of death without Christ even in utero.

Rather, I believe humanity fell as a race, whether that was through Adam and Eve or some more metaphorical representation of humanity like Theistic Evolutionary proponents would hold to.

So God judged humanity in total as a race, the heads of which had "waged war" against Him. So all human offspring born into the "human camp" now carry that stigma, which as we grow up and live our lives is verified over and over again that we just in our human nature turn away from God, insult Him and go against Him... indeed bury knowledge of God. The OT and history of Israel, their story, accentuates this point over and over. How disloyal they/we are to God, and yet God persists with us, remains steadfast and faithful to humanity at large, and finds a way -- via the Messiah, the Christ.

Yet, so long as we carry the imago dei, there is goodness in us. We're not all totally depraved.
I disagree with 5-point Calvinist doctrine here and total depravity. If God desires us, and we're totally depraved, then God desires total depravity.
Such just doesn't make logical sense to me.

But, to the original question of Adam and Eve, I do believe all living people today descended from one human couple.
Certainly, I can see alternatives if one chooses to loosen the reigns on Scripture which still keep in with more popular and loose forms of "original sin".

Further, I'm always bemused by those who advocate evolution and raise this argument.
I mean seriously, if we are all descended from a common bacterial ancestor, somehow genetic diversity finds a way... right? Or as Jurassic Park movie states, "Life finds a way." And then we turn to a male-female couple, which does seem logical, and say "No way! You ignoramus Bible believing fools!" -- there's not enough genetic diversity in a human couple alone.
Well, once there was zero genetic diversity right? So arguments that we can't possibly share a common ancestor, due to a lack of genetic diversity seems almost like a cheeky argument. Even an argument from ignorance, like the kind many who believe in a common evolutionary ancestor often accuse ex nihilo creationists of making against natural evolution not being possible due to irreducible complexity and the like. Ironic that a similar line of argument is made then against those who believe in a literal Adam and Eve.

I try not to step on theistic evolutionists toes even if I reject evolution like if I'm out and about engaging atheists and I see a theistic evolutionist trying to engage them.I know that no matter what theory science comes up with it points to God as the cause including evolution.Also even if I disagree with theistic evolutionists I still respect them as a brother/sister in Christ.I also extend that respect to young earth creationists too.I mean,if we are discussing our creation theories?I'll defend what I believe and why,but I still am respectful about it after it is over.However I do see this point about Adam and Eve a sticking point if you are a theistic evolutionist,but every creation interpretation has its sticking points.

[RickD]

With all that's going on regarding same sex marriage, I'm starting to think we have been misinterpreting the bible. Maybe God did create Adam and Steve, not Adam and Eve...

Signed,

Anonymous

[crochet1949]

Well -- we've observed the combo of egg/sperm is needed to produce a baby. And the man/woman combo Does meet that criteria / sperm and egg. So Logic would indicate that 'way back when' the same combo was needed. A human man and woman together at the exact same time -- very literally -- Adam and Steve would only have contributed Lots of sperm. And That won't get the human race 'going'. Any more than two women --producing eggs -- but to no avail without that sperm.

People being married or not -- it Still requires egg/sperm.

[PaulSacramento]

Unless of course our understanding of original sin is far too "Augustine"...
I personally think that there was an Adam and an Eve BUT I also think that if there wasn't and it was simply a story to address the issue of "original sin", then that is fine too,
The death of Christ atones for the sins of those that believe in Him.
OUR death is what pays the price for "original sin".
In short, the atheist believes that ALL christians view "original sin" the same way and, as usual, an atheist has refute NOT Christianity but his OWN understanding of what HE THINKS Christianity is.

[patrick]

I tried working out in what sense the story of Adam and Eve could be allegorical, but I think the core story has to remain the same: our ancestors fell to temptation, and we were born from our ancestors, to live and be raised by them.

How exactly original sin came about doesn't seem all that important to me though, as we are clearly already in a world where we all have sinned and are in need of redemption to find our way to God. I think this is the sense in which most people don't care whether the story of Adam and Eve is true or not.