theophilus wrote: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.
)
