Re: Re: How to interpret Adam (was: Re: Kerkut)

From: John W Burgeson <>
Date: Wed Feb 25 2004 - 10:09:21 EST

Dick wrote: "For those who believe that a real live, flesh and blood,
biological Adam didn't exist, there is no problem placing him at all. A
man who doesn't exist can not be anywhere he chooses not to be. Real
people have fewer options. Real people are stuck in time and place."

 There are three options, not two, for a person to have:

        a. Believe Adam as a unique person existed
        b. Believe Adam as a unique person did not exist
        c. Have no belief one way or the other

I find myself, as with many other beliefs strongly held by others, to
occupy position 1c. Were I to have to choose between a and b, I'd
probably choose b. But I don't see that as necessary.

There are always those Christians who see a belief in a certain
historical fact (or alleged fact) of history as being the definition of
whether or not one is a Christian. That always seemed strange to me.
Almost as strange as those who see performing good works as definitive,
or having certain emotional feelings as definitive.

So -- what defines a person as a Christian?

1. Intellectual belief in one or more facts (or alleged facts)
2. Doing good works
3. Having an emotional experience (say -- like Pascal's)
4. Something else

As evangelicals (most here), #2 is ruled out
As American Protestants (most here), #3 is problematical
As people who take Scripture seriously (most here), #3 is problematical
(The demons believe, and tremble)

But what, then, is that "something else?"

Burgy (Maz humiliates the Yankees)

The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit to sign up today!
Received on Wed Feb 25 10:21:24 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Feb 25 2004 - 10:21:26 EST