Re: [asa] Who do Adam & Eve represent? (Was: Was Adam a real person?)

From: Jack <drsyme@cablespeed.com>
Date: Tue Apr 15 2008 - 06:27:14 EDT

I dont know whether it was intended or not, but the way the question was asked made me think that you had a specific answer in mind, and I was likely to get it wrong, so I was waiting to hear the answer.

I think the story is about Man, who was created by God to be in a close relationship with God, (above the angels, above the animals,) whose purpose was to be stewards of God's creation, but fell out of that relationship with God, creating the need for a redeemer to come to restore that relationship.
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: George Murphy
  To: Jack Haas ; Gregory Arago ; ASA list
  Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 8:38 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Who do Adam & Eve represent? (Was: Was Adam a real person?)

  Well, the small number of responses to the "Who do Adam & Eve represent? thread in comparison with the large volume of "Was Adam a real person?" ones indicates that not many on this list are interested in pursuing the 1st question. I find this unfortunate. Perhaps I could have phrased that 1st question better but I think my intention was fairly clear - i.e., what do the texts about the 1st man & 1st woman in Genesis mean if those texts aren't to be understood as historical narratives &, in particular, if Adam & Eve were not historical individuals?

  The fact that folks here would rather debate the 2d question & instead of the 1st suggests that they aren't very interested in doing serious theological thinking about evolution. Neither those who believe in a "real Adam" nor those who don't want to wrestle with questions about what it means theologically for human beings - and, in particular, Jesus of Nazareth - to be members of an evolved species.

  So I think Gregory is right that most participants here feel safer dealing with science than with theology. I find his characterization of theology - really his dismissal of theology - most unfortunate. Theology is, in the classic phrase, "faith in search of understanding." Should Christians not want to understand? Or to put it even more simply, theology is just thinking about what we believe? Are Christians not supposed to think about that? Are we supposed to leave our brains at the church door?

  (Of course the "inevitable mythology" of theology is just Gregory's rhetoric.)

  Shalom
  George
  http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Jack Haas
    To: Gregory Arago ; ASA list
    Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 8:01 PM
    Subject: Re: [asa] Who do Adam & Eve represent? (Was: Was Adam a real person?)

    There you go again Gregory: one more cheap shot about people you know nothing about!
    Jack Haas

    Gregory Arago wrote:
      Notice that few at ASA, especially those who don't accept 'Adam [as] a real person' are prepared (or willing) to speak about 'Who do Adam & Eve represent?' Perhaps people think there's not much 'science' in representation. It is much safer to speak about science, after all, as it gives a sense of legitimacy that theology doesn't seem to imply with its inevitable mythology.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail

    To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Apr 15 06:29:06 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Apr 15 2008 - 06:29:07 EDT