Re: classic arguments

Arthur V. Chadwick (
Mon, 08 Dec 1997 16:55:09 -0800

At 05:43 PM 12/8/97 -0500, George wrote:
> Of course Genesis was authoritative for Jesus, but again -
>establishing authority & truth do not settle questions of genre &
>interpretation. Jesus was also (because he was who he was) free to add
>to Genesis - note Mk.10:9, even though Genesis 2 had not previously been
>understood to oppose divorce.

That's an assumption I would like to see support for.

& it's consistent with that that Paul
>gives Christ priority over Adam in Romans 5,

Huh? Consistent with what?

so that trying to
>understand human nature in terms of an historical Adam is henceforth a

Whoa! You had me with you right down to that last line. Where did you
uncork that one? Is that a logical conclusion? I think not. Perhaps you
can track the logic somehow, but it is not a premise I would accede to
based on this line of reasoning. I thought those who wanted to reject an
historical Adam did so on the basis of something more substantive than this...