(November 2, 2012 at 11:07 pm)Reasonable_Jeff Wrote:(November 2, 2012 at 10:30 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: If someone with a masters in theology comes out empty-handed then I doubt that there's no problem with evolution like you're proposing. Think about it, what are we actually being saved from? The sins that we actually can't commit because sin never entered the world?
Allow me to explain the view, it's the one that I adhere to.
The way Gen 1 is written is completely different than the way Gen 2 is written. The word repetition is like a song while Gen 2 is written like a historical narrative. In the original hebrew it becomes more apparent that Gen 1 is poetry.
This isn't uncommon in the Bible.
Ex 14: historical narrative about event
Ex 15: song about same event
Judge 4: historical narrative about event
Judge 5: song about same event
Agreed. The Bible is definitely a collection of different types of genres.
[/quote]
Gen 1 conveys what's important...In the beginning God created and it does it in a way that's beautiful and easy to remember.[/quote]
Ok, perfect. So we have allegory so far.
Quote:Gen 2 begins the historical narrative which includes Adam and Eve.
Granted this type of evolution is different from one that says "there is no intelligent agent overseeing the process."
Ok, so you see A&E as being historical. How do they fit into evolution?
Quote:Within Christianity beliefs differ further within this views on how to interpret gen 2 as well.
Hope this helps!
But at the end of the day, you say Original Sin literally happened, correct?
I think we might be getting there, slowly hehe.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle