How can you be a True Christian™ if you don't take the Eden story literally?

[Subduction Zone]

I disagree with your perspective. The Bible doesn’t really address the structure of the earth, but nothing in the biblical scriptures actually supports the idea of a flat earth and there’s just as much or more to indicate a globe.
As far as all the things you claim to be known…
…”We know that there never were only two people. We know that we are the product of evolution. We know that there was no global flood, in fact to such an extent that people that claim that there was such a flood…”

I say you do not KNOW. You were not there. Those who study such a distant past were not there. So it’s conjecture. At best such ideas about such early history are an educated guess and even these are influenced by one’s initial biases.

Then you do not understand your own Bible and are using biased interpretations. You probably do not understand geometry either. More than once a person goes to a great height, once it was Jesus, to see all of the Earth. That only makes sense on a Flat Earth. As to what we know, no it is not "conjecture". That is a an accusation that that puts the burden of proof upon you. Why do you think that being there matters? You do not even appear to understand what the word "conjecture" means. You are likely reading lying resource3s. You do not seem to understand that we have endless evidence that supports what I claim. There is no reliable evidence for your beliefs.

You should try to learn a little bit of science. If you just understood the basics of science you could see a clear patter emerge.

Have you ever participated in any of the evolution threads or those on the Flood of Noah? An honest person has to admit that a literal interpretation of Genesis is wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"We" know that but most Christians do not know that, since their religion depends upon those being literally true. Take a way Adam and Eve and original sin and what do you have left? Christianity come crashing down like a house of cards. What do you have Jesus dying for on the cross?

Actually most Christians do know that. I am not about to dig it up, but there are estimates that worldwide maybe 40% accept the myths of Genesis. Even in the US those numbers are continuing to drop.

 

[Aupmanyav]

God's Laws change over time in accordance with the necessities of the times:

I want to know what your manifestation said about it. What Abbas, Shoghi or HoJ said is not relevant.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Come on.
No. Jesus was quoting Genesis 2:24. So who is that account about?
The “them” was Adam & Eve. They were “made.”

In the interests of accuracy… Jesus was addressing the Pharisees. Vs.3.

But Jesus was traveling with his disciples.

.They knew without a doubt that Jesus was referencing A&E.

No, that was clearly a poetic verse. Quote mining Jesus has to be a very serious sin if one is a Christian. Now the thing is that Jesus may have believed the myths of Genesis. Though he never made that clear. But that would not help you. It would only tell us that Jesus was just a man.

Do you really want to make that argument?

 

[Trailblazer]

I want to know what your manifestation said about it. What Abbas, Shoghi or HoJ said is not relevant.

Divorce is strongly condemned in the Bahá’í Teachings. If, however, antipathy or resentment develop between the marriage partners, divorce is permissible after the lapse of one full year. During this year of patience, the husband is obliged to provide for the financial support of his wife and children, and the couple is urged to strive to reconcile their differences. Shoghi Effendi affirms that both the husband and wife “have equal right to ask for divorce” whenever either partner “feels it absolutely essential to do so”.

Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Pages 210-211

reference.bahai.org

 

[Trailblazer]

Now the thing is that Jesus may have believed the myths of Genesis. Though he never made that clear. But that would not help you. It would only tell us that Jesus was just a man.

There is no reason to believe that Jesus believed the myths of Genesis. I do not think He did since Jesus got His knowledge from God, and God knows those are only allegories since God is All-Knowing.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

There is no reason to believe that Jesus believed the myths of Genesis. I do not think He did since Jesus got His knowledge from God, and God knows those are only allegories since God is All-Knowing.

And even if he did, it would not make them any less myths.

 

[CG Didymus]

Actually most Christians do know that. I am not about to dig it up, but there are estimates that worldwide maybe 40% accept the myths of Genesis. Even in the US those numbers are continuing to drop.

When TB says that Christianity depends on the literal Adam and Eve story and that without it, what is left of Christianity, and it crumbles. I agree with her. Yet, Baha'is call Christianity a true and revealed religion? That's has too many reasons to make them fall like a house of cards as well.

I think the Baha'i Faith would have been better off saying, plainly and clearly, that the Bible and the NT are mythical, fictional and were written by men. But they're kind of stuck needing the Bible and NT to be somewhat true and revealed to men through an accepted and approved manifestation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

When TB says that Christianity depends on the literal Adam and Eve story and that without it, what is left of Christianity, and it crumbles. I agree with her. Yet, Baha'is call Christianity a true and revealed religion? That's has too many reasons to make them fall like a house of cards as well.

I think the Baha'i Faith would have been better off saying, plainly and clearly, that the Bible and the NT are mythical, fictional and were written by men. But they're kind of stuck needing the Bible and NT to be somewhat true and revealed to men through an accepted and approved manifestation.

A lot of Christians do not seem to see the need for a real Adam and Eve. Man is just naturally flawed.

 

[metis]

Man is just naturally flawed.

Speak for yourself!!!

 

[Aupmanyav]

If, however, ..

So, the law has changed, or perhaps Bible does not report correctly what Allah desired.

 

[Trailblazer]

So, the law has changed, or perhaps Bible does not report correctly what Allah desired.

That is what Allah desired when the Bible was written, but now the law has changed, as per Baha'u'llah.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

God knows those are only allegories since God is All-Knowing.

Just what basis do you use, for thinking they are myths?

Believing that, completely negates the need and value of Jesus’ sacrificial death as a perfect man.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

But in the scientists’ version, based on DNA analysis, “Adam,” the genetic ancestor of all men living today, and “Eve,”the genetic ancestor of all living women, seem to have lived tens of thousands of years apart.Read more: Genetics Suggest Modern Female Came First

Yes, I know what they’ve discovered, is that the DNA evidence indicates the woman, from whom we’ve all descended, came first. And that would indicate Eve.

And the man from whom we’ve all descended, who came later, would be Noah!!

How do you know that the Pharisees knew that?

Because the Jewish Pharisees knew the Hebrew Scriptures! It was *their* book.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just what basis do you use, for thinking they are myths?

Believing that, completely negates the need and value of Jesus’ sacrificial death as a perfect man.

What makes you think that there is such a need? Why would an omnipotent God need a sacrifice? That is an antiquated concept that is in fact rather immoral.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, I know what they’ve discovered, is that the DNA evidence indicates the woman, from whom we’ve all descended, came first. And that would indicate Eve.

And the man from whom we’ve all descended, who came later, would be Noah!!

No, You are simply misunderstanding the science that tells you that your beliefs in Noah are wrong again.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

What makes you think that there is such a need? Why would an omnipotent God need a sacrifice?

Because although Jehovah’s omnipotent, that doesn’t mean He neglects justice to suit Himself. Perfect human life was lost for mankind, as descendants of A&E we too inherited imperfection. But Jehovah provided the Christ, and through his perfect sacrifice he “ransomed / bought” us back from imperfection leading to death. The opportunity, anyways.

God & Jesus paid it…You didn’t have to pay a thing.

“That is an antiquated concept that is in fact rather immoral.”

Jesus didn’t think so. He was willing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because although Jehovah’s omnipotent, that doesn’t mean He neglects justice to suit Himself. Perfect human life was lost for mankind, as descendants of A&E we too inherited imperfection. But Jehovah provided the Christ, and through his perfect sacrifice he “ransomed / bought” us back from imperfection leading to death. The opportunity, anyways.

God & Jesus paid it…You didn’t have to pay a thing.

“That is an antiquated concept that is in fact rather immoral.”

Jesus didn’t think so. He was willing.

You are confused because you are taking the Bible literally. Jesus was almost certainly not okay with it. If you read Mark, the first Gospel, even that one indicates that he was less than pleased. Each one embellished the story a bit until you get to John where he hardly seems to care at all. So let's not conflate the reality of the story with the Bible. Let's discuss the poor morals of the NT.

Justice is not satisfied if someone else suffers in your stead. That is not justice. And most of the supposed sins that people do are not even sins at all. The biggest sin is supposed to be disbelief. How does it hurt God if people do not believe in him? The God of the Bible is immoral and has the morality of a domestic abuser. I have as yet to see a Christian that can even begin to defend the immorality of your version of God.

 

[metis]

Believing that, completely negates the need and value of Jesus’ sacrificial death as a perfect man.

That was more symbolic as human sacrifices are not "kosher".

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I disagree with your perspective. The Bible doesn’t really address the structure of the earth, but nothing in the biblical scriptures actually supports the idea of a flat earth and there’s just as much or more to indicate a globe.

This is incorrect. I can show you many scriptures that describe an earth with edges and even corners. If you Google "biblical cosmology, you see this, all flat earths under a dome with water above it and an underworld and waters below:

I say you do not KNOW. You were not there. Those who study such a distant past were not there. So it’s conjecture. At best such ideas about such early history are an educated guess

We can know much about the past from observing items and events in the present. We know that the universe is 13.817 billion years old by examining the cosmic background radiation. All a person can say is that THEY don't know how to do that, not that it can't be known by others with the necessary background to understand the evidence. I've never met you or seen you but let me make some predictions about your past: You were conceived then gestated in a womb. You were born, took a breath, and cried a first time. Eventually, you learned to walk and speak. How am I doing? Just conjecture? Were any of my "educated guesses" wrong? Of course not.

These are what educated guesses look like. They're probably true for you because they usually are for most others, but it's easy to conceive that they might not be: You're an adult. You've been to schools and had employment. You've been in love. You've owned and driven a car. Man's knowledge of the past is much more certain than educated guess, but only to those who know how to read the present.

I believe the Bible story in Genesis is allegorical.

What's it an allegory of? What were the Bible writers allegorizing? Allegory, like metaphor and simile, is a literary form that uses substitution. What were they symbolizing with Adam and Eve. Nothing that they could have known anything about. Gulliver's Travels is an allegory. The characters and events in it are fictitious but represent actual people and events from contemporary British history known to the author, Swift.