On the Historical Adam
I’ve posted some thoughts about how modernity and science interact with the historical Adam:
“The Apostle Paul did not Believe in the Historical Adam”
A debate has been raging about whether Adam was an historical figure. I think it’s important, because it represents a more general debate about how to live a modern religious life. I also think it highlights a fundamental misunderstanding.
keep reading…
Even though it’s slightly off-topic, I’m reposting the link, because I’d love feedback from readers here.
Read the whole thing here: “The Apostle Paul did not Believe in the Historical Adam.”
Dr. Albert Mohler Herodotus historical Adam Josephus Paul religion science
One Response
Interesting and insightful.
I have long observed that a great deal of religious thought occurs in a different compartment of the mind from other thought and there is a huge disconnect. For example, if you ask a person where God is, they say, essentially “everywhere and nowhere” because “God is an eternal spirit” or something similarly nebulous, but then they move into the imagery realm and have no problem with Jesus ascending upward to sit at God’s right hand. These are two completely incompatible notions, but people don’t experience any tension.
So philosophically people opine that the idea that God is a manlike deity who lives above a solid structure a mere tower-height above the dry land is pedantic, but when they discuss the scriptures, that cosmology is assumed and is not questioned. It is a disturbingly easy transition, even in our modern day.
But would you enjoy a movie if you did not suspend your unbelief? No, you might constantly be saying, “Wait a minute! That didn’t really happen! Those are just people from Hollywood!”
“Faith” is the suspension of unbelief. Without it, its kind of unacceptable intellectually.